What? The Magic Words Aren't Working!

By: sebastianjer , 12:19 PM GMT on April 12, 2012

Share this Blog

What? The Magic Words Aren't Working!

By Gary Horne

The awful truth is beginning to dawn on the left. The magic words on which they have relied to make government grow may not work anymore. The consequences could be catastrophic for progressives. So it isn't hard to understand why the progressives would visualize a Supreme Court ruling against ObamaCare as "unprecedented."

The case of Wickard v. Filburn is one of the most ludicrous decisions in the history of the Supreme Court. Secretary of Agriculture Wickard attempted to enforce the Agriculture Adjustment Act (AAA) of 1938, which set quotas on the amount of wheat put into interstate commerce and established penalties for overproduction. The secretary levied a fine on Roscoe C. Filburn for exceeding his quota despite the fact that none of Mr. Filburn's wheat was sold outside his state, and the portion sold (he used some himself) did not exceed the quota. The Supreme Court ruled in wartime 1942 (overturning a lower court ruling) that Congress could regulate the production of wheat intended for personal use and not placed in interstate commerce. In other words, the court defined non-commerce (personal consumption) as interstate commerce.

Thus, it is not surprising, then, that the lawyer arguing for ObamaCare might expect the court to redefine a non-tax as a tax (wink). After all, the court's predecessors redefined non-commerce as interstate commerce. Fortunately, the justices didn't seem to buy it.

From the 1942 ruling on, the progressives discovered that all they had to do was simply repeat the magic words, "The Commerce Clause," and the courts would approve nearly everything the Congress wanted. With the oral arguments on ObamaCare, the left had every reason to expect the same result they had seen for the last 70 years. Any other result for them would of course seem "unprecedented."

Another reason why the progressive sees an overturn of ObamaCare as "unprecedented" is because the Court may actually consider the Constitution more important and undo the legal precedent (overturn, or "unprecedent" the precedent). Once a court ruling like Filburn sets a "precedent," the words in the Constitution are tossed into the background. It is almost as if precedent erases portions of the Constitution. To the extent that that happens, we become not a nation of laws, but a nation of men who have ruled contrary to the law.

What has truly been "unprecedented," compared to the first 150 years of general adherence to the principles of the Constitution, is the massive growth and intrusion of the federal government based largely on the three magic words. The abuse of the Commerce Clause has become so entrenched that it is likely that several of the Supreme Court Justices will rule that individuals can be forced into commerce they don't want.

What is truly "unprecedented" is a 2,700-page coercive law delegating the powers of Congress to the executive branch.

Even a cursory reading of the Founders' writings and the Constitution should be enough to understand that this is not what the Founders had in mind. In fact, it is precisely what the Constitution was supposed to have prevented. The Constitution is for the most part clearly written and does not require a law degree to be understood. The law degree seems to be needed to pretend that we are still adhering to the Constitution.

Some progressive members of the Supreme Court do not seem to hold the Constitution worthy of adherence. When Obama-nominated Elena Kagan was dean of Harvard Law School, she dropped the requirement that Harvard Law School students study constitutional law. As was widely reported, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated in an Egyptian TV interview that "I would not look to the U.S. Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012."

The same Supreme Court justice took the following oath of office:

I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

The justices who ruled against Filburn had taken the same oath.

Had the ghost of Roscoe Filburn watched the oral arguments on ObamaCare, he might have thought the magic words were no longer working, having been stretched to the breaking point. That is exactly what the progressives are afraid of.

************************************************* ****
Profile Visitor Map - Click to view visits
Create your own visitor map


The religion of Climate Science





History in Pictures


β€œHe would rather have the poor be poorer provided the rich were less rich.”

- Margaret Thatcher

Reader Comments

Comments will take a few seconds to appear.

Post Your Comments

Please sign in to post comments.

or Join

Not only will you be able to leave comments on this blog, but you'll also have the ability to upload and share your photos in our Wunder Photos section.

Display: 0, 50, 100, 200 Sort: Newest First - Order Posted

Viewing: 9 - 1

Page: 1 — Blog Index

9. theshepherd
10:13 AM GMT on April 13, 2012
Quoting sebastianjer:
Dirshowitz says Zimmerman Nifonged by Corey


...and 20 years ago Racist Sharpton created another mob injustice. If Zimmerman were black, Racist Sharpton would be screaming False Arrest.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/crown _hts_fury_38tR1JfphLH4X9An8W8VYL
Member Since: September 11, 2008 Posts: 9 Comments: 10077
8. sebastianjer
1:16 AM GMT on April 13, 2012
Dirshowitz says Zimmerman Nifonged by Corey
Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
7. sebastianjer
11:51 PM GMT on April 12, 2012
Re 6

I agree that the economy will be the primary factor in the elections, but I doubt that it will be as simple as job numbers or even unemployment %. I think the single biggest indicator has and will continue to be the "direction of the country" question.

The problem with the RCP charts, though I really like them and check them daily, is that they are a compilation of many polls, just since you posted that Obama's numbers have dropped to 47.8 approve and 47 disapprove at RCP.

These compilation polls would be fine except many polls this far out poll "all" people. Anyone who follows polls knows that there are three types of polls with increasing degrees of accuracy when it comes to elections. Those polls that poll "all"- polls that poll only "registered" voters and the most accurate of all the polls that poll only "likely" voters.

Polls that poll all people re very inaccurate and often times are used to "make a point". As we get closer to the election almost all the polls will switch to only polling likely voters and then most polls will begin to "come together". It is almost not even worth paying attention to polls of "all" and people who put much weight in those are not getting a very good picture of what is happening with "real" voters and when it comes down to it that is all that counts.

To show the difference ABC/WAPO poll of "all" released this week (which greatly over sampled Democrats) showed Obama aproval at 50/45. FOX just released their poll of "registered voters (which probably under sampled Independents) shows Obama 42/51. Both of these polls, along with others, are now figured into that RCP average. Obviously two polls that far apart both done in the same week can not both be correct and neither is and certainly neither is an indication of what will happen in November.

I would say based on following polls for years, my gut feeling is that Obama is somewhere in the mid 40's approval wise and that would be of the entire population among those most likely to vote in November it is probably lower.

I personally (again a gut feeling) think that barring some major change in the dynamics pretty soon, Obama does not stand a chance. But the election is a long ways off and he is the incumbent so we shall see.
Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
5. latitude25
7:55 PM GMT on April 12, 2012
conservatives don't poll...
...they hang up
Member Since: August 24, 2007 Posts: 0 Comments: 3654
4. sebastianjer
7:03 PM GMT on April 12, 2012
Re 3

Thanks for posting that, I will have to remember where it is on here so we can refer back to it as the months pass and see how it changes. It must be noted it is a state by state average of polls going back months so it is not really indicative of what is happening now.

For example the oldest poll calculated in the state of Michigan comes from one done on 2-10 at which point Obama was up 16. The most recent one in that series was done on 4-3 and Obama's lead was down to 4. At that rate if you use this as a guide by the time the election comes in November Romney will carry the state of Michigan by 92 points, lol.

Also none of these polls besides being averages of many polls over months, none represent polling done since Romney became the defacto nominee.

The more important aspect of that map is the colors, note the difference in Obama's solid blue states and those electoral votes versus solid red states and Romney's electoral votes. The truth is that the fact that states like Oregon, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania are not solid blue is very bad news for Obama. Also why is Iowa a toss up? It has only voted for a Republican Presidential candidate once (2000) since 1984.

Those colors are going to change in the coming months and I expect that you will post them as they do.

Thanks for posting.
Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
2. sebastianjer
4:55 PM GMT on April 12, 2012
As Seen On Twitter

Member Since: August 26, 2005 Posts: 1030 Comments: 11197
1. seflagamma
12:29 PM GMT on April 12, 2012
Good morning Jer,

Great article in your header. It is amazing that we elect people who have no regard for our Constitution and they are open about saying they disagree with it's content.

We the People, do some pretty dumb stuff in the name of "getting something for nothing".

We the People have got to stop electing people who promise you "things" and give you "walking around money" for your vote. People who encourage voter fraud and want anything but "equal justice"... Only Liberals want to allow people to vote without any type of ID because they know it is easier to commit voter fraud that way... and commiting fraud is the only way they can get elected.

If we don't turn it around and take over the Senate and keep the House this election, we are in for some really rough times ahead.. even worse than last 3 years..

Thanks for your helping in keeping these articles coming ... and your blog for the exchange of thoughts.
Member Since: August 29, 2005 Posts: 298 Comments: 40885

Viewing: 9 - 1

Page: 1 — Blog Index

Top of Page

About sebastianjer

Local Weather

Mostly Cloudy
82 °F
Mostly Cloudy