If we were to go “Jay-Walking” across America, randomly asking people about the US Constitution’s general welfare clause, we might get the question in return, “who?” Yet, general welfare is a ‘what’ not a ‘who’ and scholarly left-leaning individuals would quickly define the clause by linking it to social justice; a concept completely at odds with America’s founding principles and the clause’s original intent.
Social justice, which is based on equality of outcome, is a euphemism for social in-justice, because as socialism and communalism’s founding principle it violates God given rights to achieve social equality. These utopian ideas may sound good to the uninformed ear, but in order to achieve outcome equality government or some other authority within society must take property and possessions from those who have more than others and redistribute it to those who do not. Redistribution of wealth is a Marxist idea that should not have any place in American society!
The youthful tidal wave plunging over America’s southern border has brought the immigration debate to a critical crescendo. While most Americans are struggling with what is the moral and ethical thing to do with the children, the two political parties are struggling with how they are going to out-maneuver the other in a political chess match that has the future control of America at stake. The debate centers on giving citizenship, with full voting privileges, to people who come to America illegally.
John Koskinen’s testimony before Congress on June 20, 2014, making no apologies for the loss of over two year’s worth of emails from Ex-IRS official Lois Lerner, who is at the center of the IRS scandal, was nothing short of appalling. It not only insulted the intelligence of millions of Americans who understand the difficulty of “losing” data in this age of technology, unless it is willfully destroyed, but the sheer arrogance in the way he sat there haughtily providing no answers and no apologies personified the very image of the IRS nearly every taxpayer experiences when we must provide detailed documentation about our personal affairs or face overbearing scrutiny from the IRS that seems to presume our guilt until we can prove our innocence.
President Obama and the Democrats have embraced a legislative policy that focuses on one of their tried and true political issues, income inequality, which they define as the income gap between higher and lower income earners. They claim the rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer.
The Republicans, on the other hand, counter that the Democrats are only trying to distract attention away from the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and tee up an issue upon which they can run, since the ACA is politically a losing proposition. The Republicans are most likely accurate, but income inequality is a real issue that must be addressed, although neither party has proposed a viable solution to fix it.
Unfortunately, too many people today do not understand the actual historical causes of the war that set brother against brother and State against State. It is unfortunate, because that war encompasses many fundamental causes of current American problems and without understanding its true cause we will be unable to repair what went wrong or prevent it from happening in the future.
Adam Liptak, in his March 11, 2013 New York Times article, Smaller States Find Outsize Clout Growing in Senate, makes a logical argument, about smaller State’s having disproportionate electoral power in the Senate, based on false premises.
On December 30, 2012, the New York Times published an op-ed by Louis Michael Seidman, professor of constitutional law at Georgetown University, titled Let’s Give Up on the Constitution. The main premise of Seidman’s article is that “The American system of government is broken” because of “Our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions.” “Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse.” Ironically, his comments and examples prove the opposite to be true.
Today, millions of taxpayers hand over large portions of their income directly to the national government without considering the founders had never intended it to be this way. Instead, Americans are distracted by a debate waged between two political parties. One party is fighting to reduce taxes while the other wants to raise them to pay for social welfare spending in society. The essence of the debate is governmental distribution of income, which was never an intended purpose for taxation. But before entering into such a debate, everyone should ask, “Is there a better way to fund our national government?”
Many Americans are waking up to the seemingly insurmountable problems caused by decades of failed policies and short term “fixes” to systemic issues by both political parties. Most Americans do not understand the root cause of many modern issues and consequently support polices that increase problems instead of resolving them. The key to understanding the root cause of most modern national issues is in understanding Lincoln’s political agenda and how he violated the Constitution to achieve it.