Constitution Fidelity Test

Alright, I continue to see one GOP candidate after another rise and then fall in the polls, Newt Gingrich the latest. Are you tired of the topsy turvey of candidate speak? By this I mean; are you tired of following the polls up when the candidate you support says something inspiring or pithy that separates them from the pack only to follow the polls back down when they say something that you yourself are troubled with? Or, do you feel a pit in your stomach when you got emotionally connected to a candidate only to find out they're not exactly who they said they were, or something in their past emerges that troubles you.

Well, I have an answer for you...get off the roller-coaster of candidate popularity and take the Forgotten Men Pledge. Raise your right hand and repeat after me:

"I fill in the blank do solemnly pledge to never vote for a candidate that does not hold fidelity to the original meaning of the US Constitution. Further, I pledge to learn the original meaning of the US Constitution so that I can tell whether or not a candidate understands the original meaning of the US Constitution!"

If you can't or won't take this pledge, then you are just as big a part of the problem we're in as are the political ruling class. I know this might anger you, but I'm not sure what else to say other than the truth.

"Mark, how dare you question by commitment to the Constitution!" you might say. Okay, fair enough, but think about the following candidates statements or policies they would like to enact if they're elected president (this is taken directly from their website).

Ready?

Candidate Mitt Romney on Health care - Mitt will use limited federal regulation to correct common failures in insurance markets, while eliminating counterproductive federal rules. If you support Mitt Romney, where exactly in the US Constitution does candidate Romney find the authority to "correct common failures in insurance markets?" Candidate Romney would be correct if he wrote "Congress under the Commerce Clause has the authority to make health care trade regular between the States but as President, I do not have the Constitutional authority to turn "regulatory authority" over to any agency. Do you believe Candidate Romney has the authority as President to bring "common sense" regulation to health care? If you do, then you do not hold fidelity to the US Constitution.

Candidate Herman Cain on Energy - "We must expand our domestic energy resources by loosening government’s grip responsibly." If you support Herman Cain, where exactly in the US Constitution does candidate Cain find the authority to "loosen governments grip responsibly?" Ask yourself this; does the US Constitution delegate any authority to the President or for that matter, Congress  to have any "grip" on energy production beyond making trade regular between the States? Candidate Cain would be correct if he wrote "Congress under the Commerce Clause has the authority to make energy trade regular between the States but as President, I do not have the Constitutional authority to have any "grip" over energy production. Do you believe Candidate Cain has the authority as President to have a "grip" on energy production? If you do, then you do not hold fidelity to the US Constitution.

Candidate New Gingrich on Healthcare - "Make health insurance more affordable and portable by giving Americans the choice of a generous tax credit or the ability to deduct the value of their health insurance up to a certain amount."  If you support Newt Gingrich, where exactly in the US Constitution does candidate Gingrich find the authority to give "Americans the choice of a generous tax credit?" Ask yourself this; does the US Constitution delegate any authority to the President or for that matter, Congress  to grant a health care "tax credit?" Candidate Gingrich would be correct if he wrote "Neither the President nor Congress has the authority to regulate nor create policy regarding health care with the exception under the Commerce Clause to make health care regular between the States. Do you believe Candidate Gingrich has the authority as President to give a "generous tax credit?" If you do, then you do not hold fidelity to the US Constitution.

Candidate Rick Perry on Medicare -"Reform Medicare to be Sustainable for the Long-Term" If you support Rick Perry, where exactly in the US Constitution does candidate Perry find the authority to "reform Medicare to be sustainable for the long-term?" Ask yourself this; does the US Constitution delegate any authority to the President or for that matter Congress to have even created, never mind "reform" Medicare? Candidate Perry would be correct if he wrote "Neither the President nor Congress ever had the authority to create Medicare, therefore, I will propose ending this program by 2030 in a responsible manner." Do you believe Candidate Perry has the authority as President to "reform Medicare?" If you do, then you do not hold fidelity to the US Constitution.

Candidate Michele Bachmann on Jobs - "That's why as President, I will work to reverse the current state of affairs by ensuring businesses the resources, freedom and flexibility to do what they do best: create jobs." Sounds good, right? But if you support Michele Bachmann, where exactly in the US Constitution does candidate Bachmann find the authority to ensure "businesses the resources, freedom and flexibility to do what they do best: create jobs?" Ask yourself this; does the US Constitution delegate any authority to the President or for that matter Congress to create jobs? Candidate Bachmann would be correct if she wrote "Neither the President nor Congress ever had the authority to create jobs, however, under the Commerce Clause of Article 1. Section 8, Congress does have the authority to make trade regular between the States and when necessary, as President, I will support such measures." Do you believe Candidate Bachmann has the authority and responsibility as President to "ensure businesse the resources, freedom and flexibility to...create jobs?" If you do, then you do not hold fidelity to the US Constitution.

Candidate Rick Santorum on Jobs - "As a member of the United States Senate, Rick authored the "Workplace Religious Freedom Act" to ensure individuals of all faith could not be discriminated against while on the job.  Sounds good, right?" Again, this sounds good. But if you consider yourself a supporter of the Constitution and supporter of Rick Santorum, ask yourself this; where exactly in the US Constitution does candidate Santorum find the authority to "ensure individuals of all faiths are not discriminated against?" Candidate Santorum would be correct if he wrote "Neither the President nor Congress ever had the authority ensure individuals are not discriminated against in the workplace. However as President, I would have the bully pulpit to draw attention to the plight of workers should discrimination occur. Do you believe Candidate Santorum has the authority and responsibility as President to "ensure individuals of all faiths are not discriminated against in the workplace?" If you do, then you do not hold fidelity to the US Constitution.

Candidate Ron Paul - "Immediately saving lives by effectively repealing Roe v. Wade and preventing activist judges from interfering with state decisions on life by removing abortion from federal court jurisdiction through legislation modeled after his 'We the People Act.'” If you consider yourself pro-life, where in the Constitution do you find the delegated authority to a President, Congress or the Supreme Court to "outlaw" abortions in the fifty United Soverign State? You would be correct, as Dr. Paul is if you want to repeal Washington DC's strangelhold grip on the issue of abortion and turn it back to the States. If you do not believe this, then you do not hold fidelity to the Constitution.

President Obama - "President Obama announced a new initiative this afternoon to provide mortgage relief for struggling homeowners."  If you support President Obama on this issue, where exactly in the US Constitution does President Obama find the authority to "provide mortgage relief for struggling homeowners?" Ask yourself this; does the US Constitution delegate any authority to the President or for that matter, Congress  to grant a "mortgage relief?" President Obama would be correct if he wrote "Neither the President nor Congress has the authority to regulate nor create policy regarding "mortgage relief" with the exception under the Commerce Clause, when necessary, to make mortgages regular between the States. Do you believe President Obama has the authority as President to "provide mortgage relief? If you do, then you do not hold fidelity to the US Constitution.

Do you see a common thread in every candidate vying for your vote with the exception of Ron Paul? They all will tell you that they believe and support the Constitution but then in the blink of an eye, propose something that is WILDLY unconstitutional to get you to vote for them. They know We the People and they know that most of We the People have about as much a clue about the Rule of Law buttressing the Constitution as they do. They know your wants and needs and regardless of any Constitutional authority, they will tell you that they will do this or that for you. Whether it's a new entitlement, a war on some nation, farm subsidy, new regulation to protect your market, making things more "fair" whatever the heck that means; the list of things they will tell you they will do for you or give to you is seemingly endless. But the question is, where in the Constitution do they have the aurhority to do so?

Crickets....!

Now, the real problem is us, We the People. We figured out that we can get power and ram it down the other sides throat. We figured out we could support a certain candidate that would give us something from our fellow taxpayers, whether it's a new entitlement, or a war. But for those of us who cherish liberty, at least we say we do, how moral is it to advance our ideology or financial aggrandizement using an extra-constitutional national government located in the 10 square miles of swampland called Washington DC? Hint, not very moral.

"Aww, c'mon Mark, you're just a purist. Don't we have to start somewhere with people like Newt, Michele, Rick or Obama?" Geez, if I had a dime for every election cycle I heard someone say, "it's a start isn't it?" I'd be a millionaire so my answer is...ahh, no it's not a "start." As in BOTH parties are corrupt and have been responsible for rolling up $15,033,607,255,920 in debt. As Dr. Phil is famous for saying; "hows that working for you?"

"You might say, but Mark, what about anybody but Obama, right?" Well, my answer is if you think there's that much of a difference between any of the candidates listed above and their linked to quotes and Obama, then I have no answer for you. But remember this, when "your guy" gets elected, and you don't see the debt go down, or we're attacking another country (hint Iran) without a Declaration of War, or the FED continues to monetize our debt followed by inflation, have fun defending "your guy." 

Time for a sports analogy. It's 4th down and we're on our own 1" line with 99 yards, 2 feet and 11 inches to go for us to be out of the mess we're in. The defense is full of HUGE linemen and linebackers backed by decades of tradition, D'cevers, corruption and unconstitutional law. Liberty's survival now rests on an under-trained quarterback, and a few one-legged wide receivers. The odds are wildly stacked against liberty and sadly 75% of the fans in the stands are rooting for "their guy" on the defense. Now, all liberty has left is the proverbial Hail Mary! 

And that folks is where we're at...Hail Mary time; not getting "our guy" into office. Why? As demonstrated above with linked quotes from their own websites "your guy" will just perpetuate the mess we're in, perhaps just at a little slower pace. Do you agree? Again, all of those links are taken directly from the candidates own website.

So, what does a Hail Mary look like?

1. Only vote for a national candidate who will uphold the Constitution and the Rule of Law and can prove it...talk is cheap. Absolve yourself of the "voting for the lesser of two evils" think because at the end of the day, under this thinking, you still end up with evil. Now some will say, "but if I do that, then I'll play a part in Obama getting reelected." To that I say, PRINCIPLES should never be sacrificed at the altar of expediency. Liberty does not need a certain candidate to survive or thrive...but it does REQUIRE the eternal vigilance of a free people to do so. Obama as president for a second term may actually speed up the process of decentralization of power back to the States because folks, that's our last chance for liberty's survival...getting power out of Washington DC. And like I said, a second Obama administration may actually speed that up.

2. Study and advocate the morally superior idea of dual federalism with your friends, neighbors, co-workers, and anyone else you know. 

3. Join groups and organizations who are trying to decentralize national power back to the States. Support them financially and physically.

4. Get on-board with an Article V Amendment Convention.

5. Be principled, patient, and prepared for the coming collapse of our society and economy...civil unrest is here already.

6. Take your mind off of the illusion that any national candidate, even Ron Paul, will fix Washington DC. As we say over and over on the show, Washington DC will NEVER fix Washington DC.

In closing, this is not an attempt at a clever blog post...I really do believe and act as I have written. 

My question to you is; will you take the Forgotten Men Pledge?