An Overlooked Line in Declaration Brought to Light

On this 4th of July, allow me to take a moment of personal privilege to congratulate my parents, Robert and Earline Cole on their 74th wedding anniversary. Both in their 10th decade of life still love each other till death do us part. Congratulations.

On its last day in session, the US Supreme Court handed down a ruling in the case of West Virginia v EPA that, without making specific mention, brought to light an overlooked line in the Declaration of Independence. One of the specific grievances against King George was a single sentence of just 23 words.

The grievance reads: “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.”

It almost appears as if the founding fathers peered into the crystal ball to see the state of our nation two centuries down the road. We brought upon ourselves the thing we hated – the administrative state.

The administrative state is not mentioned in the Constitution. Although it resides in the Executive branch, it is not one of the branches of government. While the Constitution makes no mention of it, the administrative state has grown to enact more rules having the force of law and issues even more guidance documents. A guidance document may not have the force of law but for all practical purposes it carries the weight of law through implication and sometimes intimidation.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a concurring opinion which pointed to the rapid growth of the federal government. In one of his footnotes, Gorsuch noted that between 1970 and 1990 the Code of Federal Regulations grew from 44,000 pages to 106,000. While Congress passes 200 to 400 laws each year, the administrative agencies issue 3,000 to 5,000 final rules. (Footnote 2 in Gorsuch concurring opinion page 7)

Quoting from the Federalist papers, Gorsuch wrote, “the framers believed that a republic— a thing of the people—would be more likely to enact just laws than a regime administered by a ruling class of largely unaccountable “ministers.”

So, as you celebrate another year of America’s Declaration of Independence, keep in mind that it takes more than a mighty military to maintain our freedom. Like erosion slowly moves the earth underneath one grain at a time, our freedom is in danger of being taken over one regulation at a time by “a multitude of New Offices” and “swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.”

Have a great Independence Day and resolve to stay free.

Sign up to receive Common Sense from DC (Not Washington). I won’t waste your time or flood your inbox with junk or pleas for money. You’ll get my thoughts and commentary on various issues and stories about people, politics, and proclamation. You can unsubscribe easily at any time. I appreciate you as a reader and will strive to make it worth your while.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Impacts of Overturning Roe V Wade

When the Supreme Court handed down its 6-3 decision overturning Roe v Wade yesterday, I was interested to see the response of Congressman Sanford Bishop and Senator Rafael Warnock. The responses were predictable based on party line.

Democrats focused on a woman’s right to kill her unborn child implying that killing the child would make the pregnancy as if it never happened. Republicans focused on the protecting the rights of the unborn child.

The truth is that when pregnancy occurs, a significant event takes place in the life of the mother, and father for that matter. Killing the unborn child does not “reset” the clock, it only adds another event in the lives of the mother and father, especially the mother.

That event is an irreversible act leaving physical and emotional consequences for the mother. Then there is the child and there is no such thing as a safe abortion for the unborn child.

We as a people, must be willing to recognize the biological, emotional, and spiritual values of conception and abortion. These values reveal the political, cultural, and spiritual impacts on our society from the reversal of Roe v Wade.

Political Impact

The Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v Wade will have wide-ranging political impacts. State legislators, especially Democrats, will no longer have the safe haven of the Supreme Court to hide behind.

Now it is up to the legislators in each state to establish the policies and regulations of abortion. Republican legislators who quickly claimed pro-life, but said they could do nothing about the Supreme Court no longer have Roe v Wade to allow them to avoid making a decision. Now we will see just how strong their position on right to life really is.

Democrats, especially in strong church communities, will have a more daunting challenge – if the church community will honestly connect the dots between their belief and policy and stand for the truth. The question is not about a woman’s right. The question is whether or not the public official is for or against killing a child in the womb.

Pro-life advocates must adopt a strategy of focus on the life of the unborn child and challenge those who they influence to keep the reality of the baby at the forefront. In plain language, abortion is killing an innocent, unborn baby, snuffing out the possibility of hopes, dreams, accomplishment, and value to our world.

Cultural Impact

The Supreme Court’s ruling on Roe v Wade will have a cultural impact as well. No longer will the right to an abortion be one of those subjects that cannot be changed. Some states, such as Georgia, will restrict abortions which will create a necessity for more crisis pregnancy centers.

In the long run, the best possible cultural change would be a strengthening emphasis on fatherhood. Family is the basic institution of society and strong, stable, fathers, are the pillars of family units.

Spiritual Impact

CNN and even Fox news will not likely speak of the spiritual impact of the Supreme Court decision. The spiritual impact is as real as the words you are reading.

In the Old Testament book of Isaiah, God spoke through the prophet to the people of Israel. In chapter 5, verses 1-7, God describes how He planted the nation of Israel with an expectation that was unmet.

Verse 7 says, “he looked for justice, but behold, bloodshed, for righteousness, but behold an outcry!” (Isaiah 5:7b ESV) It is a dangerous tightrope for public officials to walk when they ignore eternal truths and establish policy as if there is no accountability to God.

George Washington, in his first inaugural address outlined the providential care of God in the founding and establishment of our independent nation. He said, “We ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of heaven cannot be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which heaven itself has ordained.”

For half a century, Roe v Wade blatantly disregarded the eternal rules of order and right which heaven itself has ordained. Now our nation began a correction, one state at a time, regarding the life of the innocent.

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court revisited Roe v Wade and concluded that it is unconstitutional. We have seen the impact on our nation over the past 50 years. Now what kind of impact will we have because of this decision? I pray that as a nation, we will make good on this gift we have been given by the Supreme Court.

Sign up to receive Common Sense from DC (Not Washington). I won’t waste your time or flood your inbox with junk or pleas for money. You’ll get my thoughts and commentary on various issues and stories about people, politics, and proclamation. You can unsubscribe easily at any time. I appreciate you as a reader and will strive to make it worth your while.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Reapportionment – A Reason for Optimism in the 2nd District

There is little choice but to expand into strong Republican counties. The 2nd District could finally be competitive.

Every ten years we have a census in the United States. The purpose of the census is to determine the number of representatives from each state in the US House of Representatives. States and local governments also use the census to redraw the political districts, from Congress to County Commissions and many more.

The Supreme Court has established a rule commonly known as, “one man, one vote” for political districts. Continue reading

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Where to Now?

The “Hate Donald Trump” show in Congress dropped the curtain on its final act. Donald Trump was acquitted in the Senate trial and that saga is finally over for now at least.

The proceedings were called an impeachment but that is a misnomer. An impeachment is a trial to remove a current office holder from office. Continue reading

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Yeah, I Said That

Honorable Brian Kemp, Governor
206 Washington Street
Suite 203, State Capitol
Atlanta, GA 30334

December 19, 2020

Dear Governor Kemp,

Call a special session of the Georgia Legislature. Since November 3, we have heard repeatedly “there is no credible evidence” of widespread fraud that would change the outcome of the election.

What is the basis for that statement? Has there been a court case that actually ruled on the factual claims? Continue reading

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

The Rule of Law and Where We Need to Focus

Why not “do the right thing and concede?” Is it not for the “good of the nation?” After all, Nixon conceded to Kennedy when there were serious questions about Cook County, Illinois.

This is the question raised by so-called moderates. Some Republicans joined the chorus, but fortunately, most Republicans have not. Continue reading

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

Democrat Doublespeak

Leslie and I took a cruise at the end of the year and just returned. I purposely declined the ship’s internet package so the only reason I carried my phone was to take pictures.

We needed to get away from everything and make a major decision. I will write more about that in the near future. Continue reading

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather

My Take on the Schiff Hearings

I have had several people ask me about the hearings that the House Intelligence Committee held over the past two weeks. I heard a lot of interpretations, understandings, and opinions from witnesses, but no facts that differed from the transcript of the phone call to the Ukrainian President that President Trump provided. 

The witnesses were all connected with the State Department or Intelligence community. They appeared to be disturbed over the call because the President did not follow their talking points or because he made the call at all. 

It was clear that Democrats set the rules to prevent Republican participation to the fullest degree possible.  When Republican Congressman David Nunes attempted to yield a portion of his time for questioning to Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, Schiff ruled her out of order because the rules, adopted just two weeks earlier, only allowed Nunes to yield time to the legal counsel.

One of the most revealing moments came when Republican Jim Jordan asked Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman to name the individual to whom he spoke about the call. Vindman had earlier testified that he spoke to someone in the intelligence community. 

Vindman had also testified that he did not know who the whistleblower was. When Jordan asked to whom Vindman spoke, Chairman Schiff immediately interjected that he was not going to allow the witness to identify the whistleblower.

Jordan pointed out the obvious logic that if Vindman does not know who the whistleblower is and Schiff had publicly stated that he did not know who the whistleblower is, then how was Vindman outing the whistleblower?

What happens next? It looks like the Intelligence Committee will make a recommendation to the House Judiciary Committee to proceed with formal impeachment hearings. 

The report will present the opinions of the unelected bureaucrats as the troubling proof that the President abused his authority and should be removed. I do not think that Republicans will be allowed to provide a minority report .

Since Democrats have a majority, the Schiff report will be treated as the gospel. Democrats in the House will wring their hands in anguish over this travesty by the President as the Judiciary Committee begins its hearings.

Democrats will wield the power in the House of the simple majority and try to find one Republican to join them. If they find just one Republican to join them, be prepared to hear the term “bi-partisan majority impeachment”  until you are sick of hearing it.  

The high stakes match up comes if Nancy Pelosi goes through with this for a full impeachment vote. Once the matter goes over to the Senate, the Republicans are in control and they will not be gagged. 

All of this going on here at Christmas time is the lump of coal in the stocking for the American people every time they turn on the news. There is a bright side to this though.

Given the dismal viewership ratings of the Schiff hearings, Americans won’t be watching the news. They will be too busy watching Hallmark Christmas movies and shopping.

FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailby feather