Article V, The Antidote

A couple of excerpts from The Liberty Amendments, written by bestselling author, attorney, president of the Landmark Legal Foundation, talk radio host Mark R. Levin, who worked in the Reagan administration and was chief of staff for Attorney General Edwin Meese.

The book details a plan, a path, some even call the rip-cord, for preserving the government as the founders intended from an over-reaching one as exists today. It was so important, it was put in the Constitution in Article V.

The delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention and the delegates to each state’s ratification convention foresaw a time when the Federal government might breach the Constitution’s limits and begin oppressing the people. Agencies such as the IRS and EPA and programs such as Obamacare demonstrate that the Framers’ fear was prescient.

The founders knew that in the event of an over-reaching or out-of-control branch, or branches, of federal government, the states needed a remedy to correct, since the tyrannical branch(s) in question would never allow itself to be corrected. This is what Article V was written for.

Prior to his inauguration, do you remember president-elect Obama saying we were just days away from “fundamentally transforming the United States of America?”

By this, of course, President Barack Obama did not mean a fresh allegiance to the nation’s founding principles and a new respect for the Constitution’s limits on federal authority, but the converse. He is more blatant and aggressive than his twentieth-century predecessors, but faithfully follows the footsteps of the most transgressive among them.

Having delegated broad lawmaking power to executive branch departments and agencies of its own creation, contravening the separation-of-powers doctrine, Congress now watches as the president inflates the congressional delegations even further and proclaims repeatedly the authority to rule by executive fiat in defiance of, or over the top of, the same Congress that sanctioned a domineering executive branch in the first place. Notwithstanding Congress’s delinquency, but because of it, an unquenched President Obama, in a hurry to expedite a societal makeover, has repeatedly admonished Congress that “[i]f [it] won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will!”—that is, if Congress will not genuflect to his demands, and pass laws to his liking, he will act on his own.

And the president has made good on his refrain. On a growing list of matters, he has, in fact, displayed an impressive aptitude for imperial rule. With the help of a phalanx of policy “czars,” from immigration, the environment, and labor law to health care, welfare, and energy, the president has exercised his executive “discretion” to create new law, abrogate existing law, and generally contrive ways to exploit legal ambiguities as a means to his ends. He has also declared the Senate in recess when it was not, thereby bypassing the Senate’s constitutional “advice and consent” role to install several partisans in top federal posts.

What was to be a relatively innocuous federal government, operating from a defined enumeration of specific grants of power, has become an ever-present and unaccountable force. It is the nation’s largest creditor, debtor, lender, employer, consumer, contractor, grantor, property owner, tenant, insurer, healthcare provider, and pension guarantor. Moreover, with aggrandized police powers, what it does not control directly it bans or mandates by regulation.

A convention of the states, per Article V of the Constitution is the antidote for such a tyrannical federal government.

Article V sets forth the two processes for amending the Constitution, the second of which I have emphasized in italics:

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress.

Read Chapter One of The Liberty Amendments below. Courtesy of its author, Mark R. Levin.

Link: Convention of States

Margaret Sanger, The Negro Project, Black History Month

What better time than Black History Month to recall the roots of Planned Parenthood. The brainchild of Margaret Sanger, who believed in the eugenics of “refining” the “Aryan” race.

Beginning with the ABCL (American Birth Control League). The ABCL became a legal entity on April 22, 1922, in New York. Before that, Sanger illegally operated a birth control clinic in October 1916, in the Brownsville section of Brooklyn, New York, which eventually closed. The clinic serviced the poor immigrants who heavily populated the area—those deemed “unfit” to reproduce. In 1942, the ABCL became part of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Malthusian Eugenics

Margaret Sanger aligned herself with the eugenicists whose ideology prevailed in the early 20th century. Eugenicists strongly espoused racial supremacy and “purity,” particularly of the “Aryan” race. Eugenicists hoped to purify the bloodlines and improve the race by encouraging the “fit” to reproduce and the “unfit” to restrict their reproduction. They sought to contain the “inferior” races through segregation, sterilization, birth control and abortion.

It was Margaret Sanger’s goal to abort as many Black babies as possible. To eliminate “the dangers of uncontrolled procreation.” If you’ve never heard this before, this article, The Negro Project and Margaret Sanger, sums it up nicely. It shows how she used prominent Black leaders to buy into her idea by deceiving them.

Sanger suggested the answer to poverty and degradation lay in smaller numbers of blacks. She convinced black civic groups in Harlem of the “benefits” of birth control, under the cloak of “better health” (i.e., reduction of maternal and infant death; child spacing) and “family planning.” So with their cooperation, and the endorsement of The Amsterdam News (a prominent black newspaper), Sanger established the Harlem branch of the Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau. The ABCL told the community birth control was the answer to their predicament.

The ethnic cleansing in New York City is, by Margaret Sanger’s standards, moving along nicely. In 2012, there were more Black babies killed by abortion (31,328) in New York City than were born there (24,758), and the Black children killed comprised 42.4% of the total number of abortions in the Big Apple. Despite the fact Blacks represent less than 15 percent of the population.

I’m Black. Don’t shoot me.
I’m Black.
Don’t kill me.

What’s wrong with this picture?