{"id":448426,"date":"2010-03-19T17:29:28","date_gmt":"2010-03-19T21:29:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/papundits.wordpress.com\/?p=32862"},"modified":"2010-03-19T17:29:28","modified_gmt":"2010-03-19T21:29:28","slug":"violating-our-constitution-shredding-our-rights-more","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/448426","title":{"rendered":"Violating Our Constitution, Shredding Our Rights + More"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Constitution<\/a> The Patriot Post<\/a> Digest<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Foundation<\/h2>\n

“[G]iving [Congress] a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole [Constitution] to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. Certainly, no such universal power was meant to be given them.” –Thomas Jefferson<\/p>\n

Government & Politics<\/h2>\n

Constitution in the Shredder<\/h3>\n

“We are absolutely giddy over the great news that we’ve gotten,” House Democratic Whip James Clyburn (D-SC) declared Thursday. No wonder. The Congressional Budget Office provided a predictable boost to Democrats this week with its “preliminary” estimate that the updated health care takeover bill \u00a0 … \u00a0\u00a0<\/span> (text here<\/a>) would cost $940 billion over the next 10 years — all without adding to the deficit.<\/p>\n

If you believe that, we have some oceanfront property in Arizona for sale.<\/p>\n

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) cooed, “I love numbers. They’re so precise.” That is, if by “precise” she means bogus. The CBO is required to take legislation as it’s written (or, more precisely in this case, how it’s described), not necessarily as it will be enacted. The deficit-neutral finding is based on the Demo claim that increased taxes and shuffling Medicare and Medicaid expenses will “save” money. Cutting these entitlements, however, is easier said than done. Additionally, implementation is delayed, meaning there will be hardly any spending for the first few years under the bill. On top of that, a provision was recently added to the bill that ends student loan subsidies to lenders — which conveniently accounts for nearly all of the $19.8 billion in deficit “reduction” that Democrats are touting.<\/p>\n

As we have pointed out numerous times before, however, the money business is almost entirely beside the point. House leaders are trying to foist upon us an unconstitutional nationalization of the health care industry using a cowardly and unconstitutional method, namely, the “Slaughter Rule.”<\/p>\n

Because of the election of Scott Brown to the open Senate seat in Massachusetts, Democrats were forced to abandon their machinations in the upper chamber, though not before threatening to use “reconciliation” to jam the bill through on a simple majority vote. Now, the House is planning to “deem” the Senate bill passed, rather than vote on it, in a process known as a “self-executing rule.” As Mark Alexander<\/a> observed, “‘Slaughter’ and ’self-executing’ may describe both the process and the electoral future of many Democrats in the House.”<\/p>\n

Columnist Tony Blankley<\/a> explains, “[U]nder the proposed scheme, the Senate bill would be ‘deemed’ to have passed the House and become law without a presidential signature. Then the Senate would pass the House-demanded amendments, and the House members would then cast only one vote — for the amendments they like, rather than the underlying Senate bill they hate. Thus (so Pelosi’s theory holds) politically protecting House members, who could say they never actually voted for the publicly despised Senate bill.” Profiles in courage, no?<\/p>\n

Republicans attempted to force an actual vote on the bill, but Democrats defeated that resolution Thursday 222-203. A “vote” — likely via the Slaughter Rule — on the Senate bill is tentatively scheduled for Sunday. (Here’s a list<\/a> of Democrats who might need a little encouragement.)<\/p>\n

Democrats don’t care, but Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution<\/a> is pretty clear: “[T]he Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively.” If the bill passes the House via the Demos’ trickery, no single bill will have passed both houses. Thus, we have a bill that is disliked by a strong majority of Americans, enjoys strong bipartisan opposition<\/em> in Congress, and is being rammed into law via unconstitutional means. There’s a word for legislation like this: illegitimate.<\/p>\n

Barack Obama, a narcissist if ever there was one, has made clear that his presidency hinges on the passage of ObamaCare. Turning up the pressure, Obama met with “undecided” Democrats this week, no doubt to make them offers they can’t refuse. After the meeting, Rep. Jose Serrano (D-NY) said, “We went in there already knowing his presidency would be weakened if this thing went down, but the president clearly reinforced the impression the presidency would be damaged by a loss. He was subtle, but that was the underlying theme of the meeting — the importance of passing this for the health of the presidency.” It should go without saying that Obama’s ego is not sufficient reason for trampling the Constitution while wrecking the American health system. But, then again, who says elected Democrats are principled?<\/p>\n

\"Slaughter<\/a><\/div>\n

This Week’s ‘Alpha Jackass’ Award<\/h3>\n

“I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about what the procedural rules are in the House or Senate. What I can tell you is that the vote that’s taken in the House will be a vote for health care reform. And if people vote yes, whatever form that takes, that is going to be a vote for health care reform. And I don’t think we should pretend otherwise. And if they don’t, if they vote against it, then they’re going to be voting against health care reform, and they’re going to be voting in favor of the status quo. So Washington gets very concerned with these procedures in Congress, whether Republicans are in charge or Democrats are in charge. … By the time the vote has taken place, not only I will know what’s in it, you’ll know what’s in it because it’s going to be posted and everybody’s going to be able to evaluate it on the merits.” –Barack Obama<\/p>\n

Translation: The Constitution be damned.<\/p>\n

On Cross-Examination<\/h3>\n

“Politically speaking, [the Slaughter Rule] is beyond sleazy. It’s meant to protect House Democrats, who are all running for re-election in November, from having to make a tough vote up or down on health care reform. Pelosi says of this process, quote, ‘I like it, because people don’t have to vote on the Senate bill,’ unquote. In Nancy Pelosi’s world, accountability is a dirty word. … This tactic has been used in the past, but never — never — for something as big and important as the $900 billion health care reform bill — never. Republicans are jumping all over this, rightfully so. They’re painting it as a way for Democrats to avoid taking responsibility, which is exactly what it is. Some even suggest it’s unconstitutional. Meanwhile, President Obama’s campaigning relentlessly, calling on lawmakers to pass health care reform, quote, ‘I want some courage. I want us to do the right thing,’ unquote. Well, the irony here is if Nancy Pelosi gets her way, it won’t take much courage at all on the part of our so-called representatives, will it?” –CNN commentator Jack Cafferty, who is by no means a conservative<\/p>\n

\"If<\/a><\/div>\n

The BIG Truth<\/h3>\n

“You know we’re going to control the insurance companies.” –Joe Biden, with his two cents<\/p>\n

News From the Swamp: Debt Panel Takes Shape<\/h3>\n

Barack Obama’s bipartisan panel on the national debt is slowly taking shape with the addition of six congressional Republicans this week. Joining from the Senate are Judd Gregg (NH), Mike Crapo (ID) and Tom Coburn (OK); from the House are Dave Camp (MI), Paul Ryan (WI) and Jeb Hensarling (TX). All six have pledged to push for spending cuts instead of tax increases to reduce the government’s obscenely large debt. The commission’s final recommendations will not be binding, however, and the White House has insisted that the panel complete its work after<\/em> the midterm elections rather than before. This way Democrats can have political cover when they recommend tax hikes over spending cuts in order to bring the government’s finances in order.<\/p>\n

Higher taxes alone won’t save the budget, though. The entitlements that have grown too large to manage will have to be trimmed if America is going to keep its AAA bond rating. Moody’s Investors Service suggested this week<\/a> that the U.S. is in danger of losing its top credit status if it doesn’t soon control its debt-to-revenue ratio. A lowered credit rating will harm the government’s ability to obtain favorable loans, thus leading to massively increased interest rates and taxes. The U.S. has maintained its AAA credit rating ever since Moody’s first started rating the country in 1949, though the national debt currently measures 64 percent of GDP.<\/p>\n

New & Notable Legislation<\/h3>\n

The Senate passed a $17.6 billion “jobs” bill Wednesday, the first in a series of such bills, and Barack Obama signed it on Thursday. The legislation includes highway funding as well as a payroll tax break for small businesses. Eleven Republicans voted for the bill: Lamar Alexander (TN), Christopher Bond (MO), Scott Brown (MA), Richard Burr (NC), Thad Cochran (MS), Susan Collins (ME), James Inhofe (OK), George LeMieux (FL), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Olympia Snowe (ME) and George Voinovich (OH). Last week, the Senate passed a separate $150 billion package, which included business tax breaks and extended unemployment and other benefits.<\/p>\n

Speaking of Republicans and spending, the Senate GOP defeated a bid to freeze earmarks for one year, splitting from House Republicans who made the pledge last week. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) made the case against the pledge, saying, “We would be delegating that [spending] back from Congress to President Obama to make those decisions.” Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) countered, “Folks, we have every power here by the way we appropriate to disallow the use of funds for certain things.” We pause here to remind Senate Republicans who bravely voted to ban earmarks that they don’t have to continue to request them just because they lost the vote.<\/p>\n

Finally, the Senate took care of some truly important business this week — friendlier sentencing for certain cocaine convictions. “Legislation approved by the Senate on Wednesday would significantly reduce the disparity in sentences handed out to those convicted of crack and powder cocaine charges,” the Associated Press<\/a> reports. “Currently, a person convicted of crack cocaine possession gets the same mandatory jail time as someone with 100 times the same quantity of powder cocaine.” So why the urgency? The AP answers, “That 100-1 ratio has been particularly hard on the black community, where convictions on federal crack laws are more prevalent.” The solution was to reduce the ratio to 18 to one, so we can all rest a little easier knowing that yet another unconstitutional power grab is a little less unfair than it used to be.<\/p>\n

From the Left: ACORN Rotting Into History<\/h3>\n

Despite their steadfast denial of wrongdoing, ACORN is closing up shop around the country and putting an end to a saga which has gone on for several election cycles. Predictably however, this hydra just sprouted more heads with many former chapters simply reopening under new names, and apparently they have allies in the Justice Department. The watchdog group Judicial Watch this week released a laundry list of FBI investigative material that shows that ACORN indeed falsified a number of voter registration forms but managed to shift the blame to overzealous canvassers who wanted to make an impression on their superiors.<\/p>\n

The pattern of questionable registration suggested in the documents, coupled with the lax enforcement of election laws by secretaries of state in a number of key battleground states, places the legitimacy of our electoral process into question. ACORN and its affiliate, Project Vote, claim their goal is to encourage democracy (as do many thug dictators), but they focused only on selected populations that they deemed would either favor Democrats or be willing to sell their vote. In the blind pursuit of power, these community organizers think they are above the law. So far, despite having been caught red-handed numerous times on camera, they’re right.<\/p>\n

All this sounds like the tactics of a certain onetime community organizer who’s not letting niceties like following the Constitution get in the way of his agenda, so it’s no wonder the Justice Department turned a blind eye to these allegations. Remember, ACORN was stopped only through the efforts of individuals such as James O’Keefe and Andrew Breitbart, and groups such as Judicial Watch. Who will prevent their outrageous crimes in the 2012 election?<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

National Security<\/h2>\n

Next Up: Immigration ‘Reform’<\/h3>\n

As if the health care takeover alone weren’t enough to weaken the foundation of what had been a nation of laws, Obama’s relentless juggernaut of government transformation continues. The next assault on our freedom takes the form of the so-called “immigration reform,” promised by the Chosen One during his presidential campaign. As a ready reference for the Obamaspeak term “reform,” we recommend George Orwell’s “1984″ (see updated “Doublespeak” glossary under “Hope & Change”).<\/p>\n

The “reform” of which His Worship speaks, however, refers not to real reform, but rather to blanket amnesty for the 12-20 million illegal aliens in the U.S., a payoff to the Latino community that voted two-to-one for Obama in 2008. As envisioned by The One, the “reform” bill would “include a path toward citizenship” for illegal immigrants. Of course, these scofflaws would be required to register, as well as pay taxes and penalties for “violating the law.” We can’t wait for the legal challenges from countless “normal” (i.e., non-alien) felons who would gladly “pay penalties” for violating the law and buy their way out of jail, too.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), terrorists routinely apply for permanent residency in the U.S. by seeking “green cards.” We’re also told that but for diligent follow-up actions by the FBI, a great number of these green cards likely would have been issued. The good news is that the administration has floated another liberty-sapping idea — that is, issuing national ID cards — as a means of preventing illegal aliens from getting jobs. We’re not exactly confident that that’s what such cards would be used for just because the president says so.<\/p>\n

For our part, we’re at a loss to understand why amnesty (or whatever doublespeak term the administration is using for “amnesty”) should be granted to those whose first act upon entering their “new country” was to break the law. Nor can we understand why those who have entered illegally should be granted rights to citizenship before others who have obeyed our laws in trying to seek temporary or permanent residency in the U.S. Finally, we’re at a loss to understand the concept of “retroactive citizenship” associated with entering the U.S. illegally, then having a child who becomes a citizen, and then seeking U.S. citizenship on the basis of that child’s status. If that’s not gaming the system, what is?<\/p>\n

Our recommendations: secure the borders and enforce existing immigration laws; end “chain immigration”; deny amnesty to those who have chosen to violate our laws; change by legislation the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment that grants citizenship to anyone born on American soil, despite parentage; and truly reform immigration by making it easier for skilled workers to enter the U.S. while barring potential threats. While we don’t advocate purposefully targeting any of the illegals already in the U.S., we firmly support swiftly deporting those found in the normal course of domestic law enforcement, with the warning that repeat offenders will likely face a federal penitentiary sentence.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Department of Military Correctness: No Flag for You<\/h3>\n

U.S. troops storm Haiti; raise Old Glory to mark their triumphant occupation!<\/em> This is, apparently, the twisted view of the Obama administration, which has now banned flying the American flag at U.S. military relief compounds in Haiti. When asked for an explanation, the U.S. government’s Haiti Joint Information Center said, “We are not here as an occupation force, but as an international partner committed to supporting the government of Haiti on the road to recovery.” Never a truer statement was spoken.<\/p>\n

However, that merely obscures the real reasons for the flag ban. Every other military compound in Haiti flies the flag of its nation, as it should. So why is the flag of the United States of America, a nation which has donated far more in money and man-hours to assist Haiti in earthquake recovery than any other nation on earth, the only flag banned from flying in Haiti? The answer, of course, is that our Apologist-in-Chief is ashamed of America, its history, its exceptionalism, and especially<\/em> its military. November 2012 can’t arrive fast enough.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Business & Economy<\/h2>\n

Regulatory Commissars: Dodd Introduces Financial Regulations<\/h3>\n

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) introduced his financial regulation bill this week, and he’s taking heat from all sides. Nary a one of the 10 Republicans on his committee endorsed the plan, while his liberal colleagues don’t think Dodd went far enough in creating a separate Consumer Financial Protection Agency. The CFPA will still exist, but in Dodd’s plan it will be part of the Federal Reserve, and it will allow the federal government to interfere in the management of any company that deals in credit. This means that the Fed will now stick its nose into car dealerships that issue auto loans, check-cashing companies, and even department stores that have layaway plans.<\/p>\n

The socialist hijinks don’t end there. Under this bill, a permanent $50 billion bailout fund will be established to “rescue” companies that the government deems “too big to fail.” The money for this fund will come from taxes and fees assessed on the nation’s largest financial institutions. These fees will translate into higher consumer fees at your local bank as well as lower interest rates on personal savings accounts. Additionally, the government would instill a “proxy access” provision by which companies would be forced to subsidize campaigns for board membership. This way, left-leaning labor and anti-business groups can more easily become part of the governing body of companies and force their socialist propaganda upon the shareholders. So much for laissez faire capitalism.<\/p>\n

Income Redistribution: IRS Agents Pursue Payment of 4 Cents<\/h3>\n

As the government in Washington rushes to spend trillions of dollars it doesn’t have, the IRS is doing its part to pinch every last penny from American taxpayers. In Sacramento, California, two suit-clad IRS agents recently showed up at Harv’s Metro Car Wash to demand payment of 4 cents<\/em> in back taxes from 2006. Well, 4 cents before taxes and penalties, that is. All told, the pennies debt had accrued an additional $202.31, leaving the owner with $202.35 in payment due.<\/p>\n

Ironically, the federal business call came after<\/em> the IRS issued a letter last October stating Harv’s “has filed all required returns and addressed any balances due.” Not surprisingly, the IRS refused to comment on the issue, citing “privacy and disclosure laws.”<\/p>\n

Although he complained that the IRS agents “didn’t even get a car wash” during their visit, the owner nonetheless noted the humor in the situation. “It’s hilarious that two people hopped in a car and came down here for just 4 cents. I think [the IRS] may have a problem with priorities.” We think so, too.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Around the Nation: States to Delay Tax Refunds<\/h3>\n

In place of their state tax refund, many Americans may find themselves holding a government IOU as states struggle to meet budget shortfall. USA Today<\/a> reports, “The recession has tied up cash and caused officials in half a dozen states to consider freezing refunds, in one case for as long as five months,” thus forcing citizens into providing de facto zero-interest loans to their states. New York, for example, may delay $500 million in taxpayer refunds as it faces a $9 billion deficit. In the Aloha State, Hawaiians may have to wait until the end of August to see their refunds.<\/p>\n

According to Scott Pattison, executive director of the National Association of State Budget Officers, the prospect of delayed refunds is “an indicator of how bad [the economy] is. You know things are bad when you have to do that.”<\/p>\n

Of course, the luxury to postpone payments doesn’t apply equally. For taxpayers, late tax payments mean penalties, interest and potentially even wage garnishment, property confiscation and visits to car washes. But when the IRS is late refunding to Americans the money they overpaid, repercussions might<\/em> include interest on the late refunds — interest paid with taxpayer dollars. Something is very wrong with this picture.<\/p>\n

Culture & Policy<\/h2>\n

Census Forms Arrive<\/h3>\n

The Constitution prescribes the census in Article I, Section 2, to determine how “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned.” The text reads, “The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such manner as they shall by Law direct.” Those last nine words have led to the permanent codification of census procedure in 1954, which empowers the Secretary of Commerce to determine the form and content of the questionnaire.<\/p>\n

Three years later, Congress enacted section 195, which provided, “Except for the determination of population for purposes of apportionment of Representatives in Congress among the several States, the Secretary shall, if he considers it feasible, authorize the use of the statistical method known as ’sampling’ in carrying out the provisions of this title.” Such sampling is controversial as it enables the alteration of the count based on expected under participation, which tends to be a problem disproportionately for urbanites, immigrants and students. In many ways, sampling resembles the arguments, advanced by Al Gore in 2000, that it was not actual votes that should determine the presidency, but intended ones.<\/p>\n

In 1996, the Supreme Court upheld the sampling bar against a challenge that it systemically resulted in an undercount of racial minorities. The Court reasoned that the census’s purpose was not an accurate measurement either of total people, or the distribution of the population among ethnic\/racial groups, but the distribution of the population among states<\/em>. Six years later, however, the Court approved the process of imputation, which it distinguished from sampling on fairly technical grounds. With reapportionment, and the possible future control of Congress at stake, further attempts to inflate blue state totals seems inevitable.<\/p>\n

DNA Collection on All Who Are Arrested<\/h3>\n

Conservatives have long recognized Barack Obama’s penchant for Big Government, but now he’s drawing fire from the Left. In a recent interview with “America’s Most Wanted” host John Walsh, Obama stated his support for mandatory DNA-typing upon arrest, even if the individual is not convicted — or even charged — with a crime. Several states have such laws in place, but Obama’s support extends to the federal level as well. For those on the Left, who believed they were electing a staunch proponent of civil liberties, this comes as quite a blow.<\/p>\n

In expressing their disappointment in their Fearless Leader, leftists make the inevitable comparison with George W. Bush, whom they continue to blame for every problem to have befallen the world within the past decade. Of course, the comparison is flawed. They cite Bush-era policies, such as The Patriot<\/cite> Act, which were designed to protect the country from terrorist threats in the wake of the 9\/11 attacks — a far cry from DNA-typing all Americans erroneously arrested and innocent of any wrongdoing.<\/p>\n

The ACLU is currently challenging California’s law on mandatory DNA collection, on behalf of people such as the Oakland woman who was arrested while attending an anti-war rally. Her DNA was collected even though she wasn’t charged with a crime. How pathetically ironic that Obama, once viewed as redeeming the United States from the evils of George Bush, now finds himself on the other side of the fence from the ACLU.<\/p>\n

UN Complains About New HIV Infections Among the ‘Persecuted’<\/h3>\n

According to UNAIDS, the recent rise in new HIV infections among homosexuals, prostitutes and intravenous drug users is a result of the “archaic” laws in 85 countries that make these acts illegal. These laws force homosexuals in particular to live in fear of persecution, allegedly without access to services that would allow them to prevent the disease. The head of UNAIDS, Michael Sidibe, is now asking for funds, of course, to start a “prevention revolution,” a costly campaign similar to those against smoking.<\/p>\n

However, Sidibe himself exposes the flaw in his argument. In the United States, where homosexuals are free to live their lives and have the same access to information, medicine and services as heterosexuals, 50 percent of new HIV infections last year were among homosexuals, despite the fact that they make up less than 5 percent of the population. This, Sidibe acknowledges, is due to the complacency of individuals who choose to ignore safe-sex options, such as, well, not engaging in homosexual behavior.<\/p>\n

Another question is whether such a campaign would have a significant — if any — impact in countries where homosexuality, drug use or prostitution is illegal. For example, would an ad on AIDS prevention even be run in one of the seven countries where homosexuality is punishable by death? Perhaps the UN should continue to campaign for these countries to address problem laws within their own borders, rather than asking the rest of the world to foot the bill for the consequences.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, 18 U.S. senators<\/a> have called for an end to the ban on homosexuals donating blood. In other words, despite their claims of flawless testing, John Kerry and his ilk would put innocent American lives at risk for the sake of political correctness.<\/p>\n

To Keep and Bear Arms<\/h3>\n

Senewa Kahle broke into the house of Charles and Maureen Cassidy one night last weekend in Stuart, Florida. Upon hearing noise, Maureen got out of her bed to investigate. When she saw Kahle, she alerted her husband, who grabbed his 9 mm pistol and readied himself by their door. Charles warned the intruder to stop, but Kahle approached their bedroom anyway. Charles fired several shots, hitting Kahle in the hip. The suspect, who had a knife, then attempted to flee but was found by police in a nearby yard. They also found an accomplice waiting in a getaway car.<\/p>\n

The Cassidys are part of a retirement community. One of the neighbors supported Charles, saying, “If I couldn’t take him out with my hands, I’d have to do something. We’re getting up in age around here. We have to protect ourselves.” Kahle has had previous trouble with the law, including an arrest for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

And Last…<\/h3>\n

Given the importance of the news these days, one might expect ratings for cable news channels to soar. That’s true for one particular network, but not the other two. Fox News was recently ranked number two in terms of primetime viewership (just behind USA Network) and number four overall. Alas, the official channel of the Angry Left, MSNBC, ranked 26th in primetime, while CNN didn’t even crack the top 30. The Cartoon Network, on the other hand, managed the number 13 slot in primetime, thus proving that Americans prefer animated cartoons to live ones. With that in mind, perhaps CNN could change its name to Cartoon News Network. It would increase viewership and provide truth in labeling at the same time.<\/p>\n

Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post<\/a><\/p>\n

Filed under: 111th Congress<\/a>, Barry Soetoro (aka Barack Hussein Obama)<\/a>, Conniving Politicians<\/a>, Constitution<\/a>, Demo-gogues<\/a>, Democrats<\/a>, Liberals<\/a>, Marxists<\/a>, Political Prostitutes<\/a>, Politicians for the Destruction of America<\/a>, US Government<\/a> Tagged: Annie<\/a>, Congressional Budget Office (CBO)<\/a>, Health Care Takeover Bill<\/a>, The Patriot Post<\/a>, Unconstitutional Nationalization<\/a> \"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Patriot Post Digest The Foundation “[G]iving [Congress] a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole [Constitution] to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4200,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-448426","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/448426","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4200"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=448426"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/448426\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=448426"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=448426"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=448426"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}