Category Archives: Natural Law

UPDATED: An ‘Ebullient’ President-Elect Who Cares About The Constitution As A Timeless Document

Barack Obama, Constitution, Donald Trump, EU, Europe, Founding Fathers, IMMIGRATION, Individual Rights, Natural Law

Our magnificent President-elect Donald Trump spoke to libertarian Judge Andrew Napolitano about constitutional originalists—who is; who isn’t—and the meaning of the Constitution.

Mr. Trump also asked Judge Napolitano about how you stop The Bureaucracy from legislating. As you all know, we live under a Managerial State, where the bureaucracy has vast discretion to pass and enforce laws that are never vetted by our so-called law-makers and representatives. These cockroaches have allowed it.

The Chevron Doctrine:

Did Barack Obama ever make such an inquiry? No. Barack Obama was not in the habit of hiding how he felt about the US Constitution. As much as he disliked the philosophical foundations of the republic, the president seemed to know a bit about the intent. Here’s Senator Barack Obama talking about the document Republicans seldom mention and Democrats deem dated:

… as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution … generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that. I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. You know, the institution just isn’t structured that way.

The president recognized and rejected “the Constitution as a charter of negative liberties.” Because of the obstacles the Constitution poses to “redistributive justice,” community organizing à la Obama aims at achieving extra-constitutional change.


An Ode To Paul Ryan By MSNBC’s Left-Liberal Lawrence O’Donnell

Bush, Constitution, Donald Trump, Government, Kids, Left-Liberalism, Media, Natural Law, Republicans

Oh what natural bedfellows these fleas make and how they love The People. I’m talking about the Left and the left-leaning “Right” of our political and media establishment.

Last week, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell practically glorified House Speaker Paul Ryan for, as he put it, “giving little Donald Trump his first a major kindergarten lesson in government during a meeting on Capitol Hill, putting into perspective how hard it will be for Trump to pass his outrageous legislative agenda.”

Ryan was the best and smartest Republican negotiator [code for shyster] in D.C.; Trump the worst, exalted statist O’Donnell.

Note how O’Donnell frames the right thing—naturally right thing to do—as ignorant, “magic thinking. “Ryan has been dealing with children like Trump for years,” intones this pompous member of the ruling class, in reference to Tea Party fiscal impulses and Trump Nation inclinations.

Lawrence thinks the good kind of power comes from the Law and from The Constitution, rather than from The People heeding the natural law. Naturally, to O’Donnell, Ryan, a mere boy, is the adult in the room. Trump, a man of the world, who’s built stuff, is the child, sitting at the feet of legislator-cum-apostle Paul, lapping up his wisdom.

It’s simple. If Trump doesn’t fulfill his promises, just as Barack Obama did through Executive decrees (which most certainly are in the overreaching U.S. Constitution), through brute force; he’ll be a one-term president. The Constitution is a dead letter. Has been for a long time.

Besides, “The Constitution has saddled Americans with a very strong presidency, should he choose to act on the veto it grants him. Buried in the constitutional thickets, concedes historian Paul Johnson, are “huge powers.” The American president “was much stronger than most kings of the day, rivaled or exceeded only by the ‘Great Autocrat,’ the Tsar of Russia (and in practice stronger than most tsars). These powers were not explored until Andrew Jackson’s time, half a century on, when they astonished and frightened many people.”

See “The Sovereign Agrees To … A Bourbon Summit.”

If RNC Rules Are So True To Voters, Why Keep Tweaking Them Against Popular Will?

Natural Law, Politics, Regulation, Republicans

Fox Business has just reported that the Republican National Committee has decided against “tweaking” their arbitrary rules, as is their wont when they don’t get their candidate. The atmosphere is too politically combustive. In other words, The Party knows The People are hip to the kind of thing the RNC did with the Romney initiated Rule 40(b), in 2012, to make Ron Paul vanish.

Incredibly, the yarn the lyin’ media has spun is that the complaints against the Party bureaucracy are a figment of Donald Trump’s imagination. Unlike The People, these shysters can’t tell the difference between man-made rules and natural law. They seldom question The Rules.

If RNC Rules are so immutably fair, so small-r-republican, so true to the voters—why do they need constant tweaking in a direction away from popular will? And why, when a decision not to tweak them comes down, does Chairman Reince Priebus advertise the hell out of his decision not to rock the boat and usurp the voters?

UPDATED: Principled Patriots React To Ranchers Hammonds’ Plight

Ilana Mercer, libertarianism, Natural Law, Private Property, States' Rights

The 3.1K number on my WND column, “Ranchers Hammond & Bundy: The Best of America,” refers to the number of times the column has been shared via any of the methods represented by the logo buttons to the left of the 3.1K. So that’s 3,100, a really big number, if accurate, but who knows?

2016, Hammond, WND Capture


Writes Tim:

Ms. Mercer,

The show isn’t Hammond or bundy or even the Feds; it’s the transformation of rural America from a once-independent/gutsy psyche to what you saw today – the Burns locals showing up and asking the take-over guys to leave. Who planted fear and gutlessness into a community like Burns? I came back from combat in the Nam (usmc) and worked many jobs in the Oregon high desert; timber felling, loading hay trucks, fighting wild fires. These were once tough people who (then) would have supported the take-over stand, unanimously – seen its higher value as part of their own heritage. You’re smart, Ms Mercer, so tell me how urban fear and self-seeking became homogenized into this country’s entire demographic landscape. Was it media? Was it public education? Was it greed? Bottom line, there ain’t gonna be no more “Alamos.” Yes, the Hammonds are good guys, but even they want Bundy’s bunch outa town. It’s tragic and irreversible. What’s left is a man’s (person’s) responsibility to truth and courage; individual-by-individual, against the storm of darkness. And a lot of grace from God for that act.

Writes HS:

Another good column, Ilana. Do you ever feel like you are a voice crying in the wilderness? Your assessment of the situation of the land grab in Oregon and of those who have commented on it is a welcomed relief amid all the grandstanding from the powers that be and the media. Thank you for the level-headed analysis. You make much sense and we are indebted to you for enlightening us. Keep it up.

UPDATE: “Ranchers Hammond & Bundy: The Best Of America” was discussed on The Bill Meyer Show, January 8, 2016 (LISTEN).