Amendment IX

In the case of Kim Davis perhaps we should pay less attention to the First Amendment and more to the Ninth:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Constitutional Accountability

Isn’t it our duty as citizens of the United States of America to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for violations to the United States Constitution?

From Memo to Obama: Moving Forward Doesn't Mean You Can't Also Look Back by Arianna Huffington:

In one week, the U.S. Constitution will be front and center as Barack Obama solemnly swears to "preserve, protect, and defend" it. Given all that has happened over the last eight years, that oath is not nearly as pro-forma as it used to be.

During his final press conference yesterday, President Bush said that when it came time "to protect the homeland" he "wouldn't worry about popularity." He would "worry about the Constitution of the United States." It wasn't clear, as it hasn't been for most of his time in office, whether his concern was directed at upholding the document or circumventing it.

So as the Obama Years are about to begin, one of the questions facing the new president is what will he do about the transgressions of the Bush Years? Will his promise to protect and defend the Constitution include an investigation into the assaults on it perpetrated by members of the Bush administration?

Given the multiple -- and massive -- obstacles looming directly in front of him, Obama is wise not to be driving into the Oval Office looking in his rearview mirror. But I hope he will realize that moving forward and looking backwards are not mutually exclusive. Particularly if he isn't the one focused on the past.

There is no doubt that the economic crisis, Iraq and Afghanistan, health care reform, and the regulation of Wall Street should be the Obama administration's primary concerns.

But that doesn't mean we, as a country, should allow Bush and Cheney's offenses to accompany their perpetrators to a peaceful retirement in Texas and Wyoming.

Requiescat In Pace, Checks And Balances

What happens in the United States when the system of checks and balances fails? Apparently, nothing happens.

If both the President and the Congress violate the United States Constitution, shouldn’t something be done about it? Apparently not.

Isn’t the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, a law passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 unconstitutional? The Constitution states that “Congress shall have power to declare war.” It does not say that the President shall have power to declare war. How is it possible that Congress has written a law that goes against the Constitution? Doesn’t that require an amendment?

Who could have imagined that all three branches of the Federal government would fail us by violating one of the main purposes of our Constitution? This is why the American Revolution was fought. To get us away from the rule of kings. Now look at where we are. All hail King George. All hail King Barack, or King John, or King Hillary. Let’s remember that both John McCain and Hillary Clinton voted against the Constitution and for monarchy when they voted aye in 2002.

It’s too bad that there isn’t a three strikes and you’re out law concerning the Federal Government. All three branches have failed us, and they all should be tossed out of the game. First Congress passes an unconstitutional law, then the President abides by it, and then the Courts uphold it. And the Constitution is flushed down the toilet.

Throw the bums out!