- This is from a few days back on David Horowitz’s blog. I’ve had a hard time trying to tell people that no matter how magnificent someone like Milton Friedman was, he was not infallible, and even if he were to be right all the time STILL you could not hide behind them. You must make the argument yourself in the current context always. Friedman was a real frontline warrior for liberty. As is Horowitz. But these people can sometimes be wrong and I contend that Horowitz is wrong in the current crisis. I’ve made a great many posts on his blog over the last week or so but I thought this one had a bit of sparkle to it:
“Maybe you could change the name of the magazine to moveon.org.mag.yeswecan.com. Or something like that.
The Donofrio case is just one case of about 17 and counting. The Donofrio case didn’t go after Caliph-Select Barry-the-Ist (The Usurper) directly. So you have Clarence. Who is closest to natural law in my view. Because he doesn’t tend too much to defer to the States. Whereas you would have had the other originalists, closer to original intent, which means that, when in doubt they will defer to the states. And then you have the leftists who just make it up every day anew and are in open defiance of the oaths they have taken.
So its not surprising that when they all sat down the majority didn’t think that particular case could fly.
But its not up to the Supreme Court alone to defend and protect the constitution. The fact is a lot of people have taken that oath.
The framers never imagined that the legal system would become a vast make-work affair for lawyers. A make-work leviathan, and an outrageous attempt for lawyers to make themselves a class of their own, superior to normal mortals, in this particular sphere. This is one reason Caliph Barry-the-1st (The Usurper) is instinctively being deferred to by one judge after another.
That the framers never anticipated this vast system of legal parasitism, unrivaled in scope within any other country in the world, is the reason they never specified, step by step, procedures for taking an usurper down.
Americans mustn’t let the lawyers lay claim to their constitution and hog it for themselves. For the constitution belongs to all Americans and ought not be given away to this tawdry and parasitical clique, on the basis of all sorts of obstructionism, that the lawyers have developed for their own base interests, in the intervening years and decades since the constitution was written.
The framers would have wanted the Usurper taken down from his foolish pretenses, by any means necessary. There are at least 15 more cases where that one came from. And its just a matter of finding the case that the originalists on the court can all live with.
But on the other hand a righteous President could step down, hand the Presidency to Dick Cheney. And Dick Cheney issue an executive order that this matter be investigated fully, and he remain President until it has been checked out to saturation level.
Then President Cheney could invite legal challenges to himself!!!!! See what the Supreme Court had to say about that!!!! See how the Supreme Court liked the cases resulting from such an act of bravery. This may appear ridiculous. But its not. Since there is no precedent or instruction, so matters are open to innovation.
The point is that all branches are sworn to defend and protect. And not just the Supreme Court. And everyone, including every citizen, ought to be doing what they can.
But you have taught us, oh great one, that we are Western Man. Not given over to such notions of fate and determinism. We be masters of our own destiny. Such soothsaying is unhelpful. Remember what Margaret Thatcher said the George Bush the elder?
She said: “Look George, this is no time to go wobbly.”
I’m suggesting, and I’m sure that some others will back me up on this, that finally, after all these years we are witnessing David going wobbly. I’m sorry you had to hear it from me but the cosmic vibes from your own office are too strong. And there are others that will back me up on this matter I have no doubt.
Look David you ought to stop referring to us as your critics. My side of the argument will be divided between your exacerbated fans, and your exacerbated erstwhile fans. If you viewed us this way, you might be open to being persuaded, to thinking about taking under consideration, the possibility of the potential of taking a good long took at the subject ,anew and with fresh eyes.”