The United States Constitution is the basis of my political stance on the issues. Therefore, when trying to decide who to vote for, the first piece of criteria for me is simply: Which candidate's platform is closest to that document? I understand that none of the candidates are going to come as close as I do when it comes to understanding the Constitution. Perfection is not possible.
That said, when it comes to determining who to vote for in regards to the United States Presidency, the decision is actually quite easy.
A couple years ago I was waiting at a tire shop for my car and struck a conversation with a gentleman that was waiting with me. The political discussion was about the coming mid-term election, and during the conversation I pulled out a couple of Pocket Constitutions and began going over a couple things with my lobby-mate.
Nearby, a woman listened intently to our conversation. She remained quiet during most of the way through the discussion until finally she could not wait anymore. "Excuse me," she said.
I acknowledged her with eye contact, and she said, "Since you are a Constitution guy, then you must be very excited that President Obama is a Constitutional Scholar."
"Ma'am," I responded, "I don't think he is a Constitutional Scholar."
"Sure he is," she said. "He taught classes on the Constitution, and everything."
"A squirrel can call itself a rabbit all it wants, but that doesn't make it a rabbit."
It is obvious that Barack Obama does not appreciate the United States Constitution. He abhors it. The limiting principles of the Law of the Land stand as an obstacle to his desire to foundationally change this nation. The classes he claims to have taught were not in praise of the Constitution,
Obama touts himself to be a Constitutional Law Professor. Such a claim should be accompanied by not only knowledge of the original intent of the Founding Fathers, but awe for the brilliance of the document. Barack Obama has neither the knowledge, nor the awe.
According to Thom Lambert, Barack Obama taught the 14th Amendment, as it pertains to race and civil rights. He taught community agitation. Remember, Obama was a community organizer. He used the 14th Amendment in his classes to encourage "social justice". Just like in his presidency, he has always tried to force the Constitution into a square hole, and the 14th Amendment is what he focused on as a law professor because it comes closest to supporting his hard-left, liberal, Marxist, Alinsky driven political principles.
Meanwhile, Mitt Romney has indicated that his health care plan in Massachusetts was okay, and the federal plan isn't, because of the 10th Amendment. The final amendment of the bill of rights indicates that if an authority is not given to the federal government, and it is not prohibited to the States, it is a State power. Since there is no place in the Constitution that authorizes the federal government to stick its fingers into health care, and there is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting the States from having a health care program, Mitt Romney was exactly correct.
There is a list of examples a mile long on how Obama abhors the Constitution, and Romney is trying to abide by it (though not perfectly), so the choice is clear when it comes to my vote for President of the United States. Believe it, or not, my decision is less about party, and more about the Constitution. I suppose you could say I am driven by ideology - an ideology that may be called "conservatism," but it is powered by the limiting principles of the United States Constitution.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment