Archive for the ‘Checks & Balances’ Category

Though she didn’t admit it during her interview with KSTP’s Tom Hauser, Tina Smith’s dipping and dodging said that she’s a yes vote for packing the US Supreme Court. When asked if she’d vote to expand the Supreme Court and blow up the Constitution, Sen. Smith said “It is completely premature to talk about what we would do with the Supreme Court because we don’t know what the situation is going to be. I’m going to wait and see what happens. But let’s be clear here. What is happening right now is the Republicans are packing the court by pushing through the Supreme Court nominee against the will of the American public who believe the next president, whoever that person may be, should be the one who appoints the next Supreme Court justice. They changed their rules in order to push people onto the Supreme Court that they want to have there and that’s what they’re trying to distract us all from now.”

Sen. Smith is dodging answering the question because she wants to have another 6 years in office for people to forget about her vote to dismantle the Constitution. Voting to expand the Supreme Court is a vote to dismantle the Constitution because the Constitution relies on consisting of 2 political branches and a judicial, non-political branch.

This past week gave Democrats 3 days to tell America that their preference for a Supreme Court justice was a politician in a black robe. Democrats kept asking Judge Barrett whether she’d take into consideration the impact her decisions might have if confirmed. Judge Barrett consistently said that it’s her job to interpret the law, not write the law.

If anything is obvious, it’s that Tina Smith votes with Sen. Schumer 95+ percent of the time. Here’s what Sen. Schumer recently said about destroying the Supreme Court and the Constitution:

Once you have unified Democrat DC government, the Supreme Court will become a political branch of government. The constitutional principle of checks and balances will disappear forever. The Constitution is supposed to be a limiting document in that it’s supposed to limit government. The more that government invades our lives, the fewer choices We The People have.

I’m positive that Sen. Jason Lewis would vote against expanding the Supreme Court, thereby dismantling the Constitution. I’m as positive of that as I’m positive that Tina Smith would vote for expanding the Supreme Court and dismantling the Constitution.

Because they’re the party of government, Democrats generally don’t like limiting government. The Democrats’ worst nightmare the past 5 years was RBG dying with a Republican president and a Republican majority in the US Senate. Now their worst nightmare has happened, they’re thinking of ways to change the rules. That’s why expanding the Supreme Court is imperative to Democrats. To do that, they need Tina Smith in the Senate so Democrats can become the majority. They need unified Democrat governance in DC.

It’s time to expose the Democrats’ Supreme Court agenda and its ramifications. First, it’s time to stop calling it “packing the Supreme Court.” That’s too vague. It’s better to call it expanding and politicizing the Supreme Court. Madison, Jefferson and Hamilton established an independent judiciary that was a check on the 2 political (Executive and Legislative) branches that was free of partisanship.

The importance of checks and balances can’t be overemphasized. Without checks and balances, the potential for mob rule increases exponentially. The ability to ram through ill-advised, counterproductive legislation becomes relatively easy. Mob rule, supported by a partisan judiciary significantly increases the likelihood of trampling people’s civil rights. Democrats have said that they’d confiscate law-abiding citizens’ AR-15s and AK-47s. This summer, Democrat city councils in Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle and NYC have voted to cut their cities’ police department budgets. Minneapolis voted to dismantle the Minneapolis Police Department, though that isn’t likely to happen anymore.

Gun-grabbing Democrats, from U.S. Senate candidate Mark Kelly to megabillionaire Democrat presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg, push bills that would gut the Second Amendment. Couple that with installing partisan justices on the SCOTUS and major cuts in police funding and you’ve got a recipe for chaotic, out-of-control societies.

Another major downside to expanding the Supreme Court with partisan activists is that Democrats wouldn’t need to win major legislative victories. Democrats could just pass minor bills. Then Democrats could have one of their activists file a lawsuit and have the Supreme Court make the policy changes it couldn’t win through the legislative process.

Joe Biden stepped in it during this Q & A:

LOCAL REPORTER: But don’t the voters deserve to know…interrupted
BIDEN: No, they don’t des…I’m not going to play his game.

Let’s just be blunt. Vice President Biden doesn’t have the temperament to be commander-in-chief. Also, he isn’t smart enough. He’s actually had an over-sized ego. He’s had over-sized positions that he isn’t qualified for.

The Democrats’ SCOTUS agenda would essentially gut the Constitution by eliminating the non-political branch of government, then replacing it with an unelected activist branch of government. If that sounds like a wise system of government, move to Cuba or Venezuela.

Gov. Walz and Speaker Hortman are playing purely partisan games in an attempt to pressure Republicans. House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt has said that “his caucus will block passage of a public infrastructure borrowing package until the peacetime state of emergency Gov. Tim Walz has used to enact the stay-at-home order and other coronavirus response measures comes to an end.”

Predictably, Speaker Hortman responded, saying “it is ‘disappointing to see the minority leader threaten to block much-needed investments in local jobs and projects in our communities.'” Ms. Hortman, there’s a simple solution to this impasse. It’s found by letting the people have a say in matters. Leader Daudt laid it out pretty simply:

The Legislature is in session. We believe we should be working with the governor on the response to COVID-19 and keeping Minnesota safe.

I’ll put it in simpler terms. Minnesota isn’t a monarchy. Tim Walz isn’t an emperor. He was elected to be Minnesota’s governor, not Minnesota’s king. It’s time he dropped the monarch act and provided servant leadership.

Speaker Hortman apparently favors monarchies:

Governor Walz and his Administration have served the people of Minnesota well during this crisis, and his thoughtfulness is why Minnesotans overwhelmingly approve of his actions. Ending the peacetime emergency declaration before the emergency has passed would be reckless.

Actually, letting Gov. Walz do whatever he wants is reckless. Power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely. Right now, Gov. Walz is acting like he’s got total authority to do whatever he wants. If Hortman wants to campaign that Gov. Walz has the authority to make unilateral decisions and that he’s made nothing but good decisions, I can’t wait to see her surrender her Speaker’s gavel this November.

Gov. Walz and Speaker Hortman, if you want to run as an autocrat and the chief supporter of an out-of-control autocrat, don’t expect a gentle reception outside downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul this November. People with common sense don’t like authoritarianism. This about it this way. Gov. Walz has decided to ‘let’ more businesses open. Gov. Walz has ‘let’ people start fishing again. Gov. Walz has ‘let’ golf courses open after being pushed by protesters into that decision.

If this is right, the law needs changing:

The state of emergency, currently to end May 13, does not require legislative sign off, though lawmakers can vote to end it. House Republicans have made several unsuccessful attempts to pass legislation rescinding the order. The governor can extend the measure every 30 days with approval from an executive council of statewide elected officials, though he must call back the Legislature if he acts again after it has adjourned. Daudt said he would rather see the Legislature remain in session without a state of emergency past May to approve any virus response measures.

The legislative branch, not the executive branch, is where political disputes should be settled. Further, giving the governor the authority to extend his autocratic decisions theoretically gives him the ability to extend it indefinitely if there’s a divided legislature. Giving a governor the ability to make decisions without consulting the legislature is a recipe for disaster. Nobody should ever have that type of authority. The people must have a say in the matter.

Tony Evers, Wisconsin’s Democrat governor, now has to deal with a lawsuit brought by Republican lawmakers. Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and Assembly Speaker Robin Vos filed the lawsuit in Wisconsin’s state Supreme Court. If the court sides with the Republican leadership, which seems likely, it will be a stinging political defeat for Gov. Evers.

The GOP leaders are seeking to take away Department of Health Services Secretary Andrea Palm’s ability to make unilateral decisions during public health emergencies and instead require her to gain their approval before taking action. They say the Evers administration’s actions are outside the bounds of the law. “Purporting to act under color of State law, an unelected, unconfirmed cabinet secretary has laid claim to a suite of czar-like powers, unlimited in scope and indefinite in duration, over the people of Wisconsin,” the complaint reads.

First, let’s see what the evidence is before making judgment. That being said, if the Republicans’ description is right, then Gov. Evers and Secretary Palm would likely be heading for a defeat.

All state constitutions must meet the US Constitution’s provisions on separation of powers and checks and balances. It isn’t likely that the Democrats’ Great Lakes governors’ shelter-in-place orders would meet constitutional muster. With a single person making the decisions, it’s impossible to legitimately say that there’s a check on that person’s balance.

These Democrats (Walz, Whitmer and Evers) have overstepped their authorities. It’s just a matter of time before someone questions Gov. Walz’s authority. If nothing else, some GOP House member should challenge Walz’s authority. It isn’t a matter of whether the judge likes or doesn’t like Gov. Walz’s intentions. The only thing that matters is whether Gov. Walz has the authority to strip Minnesotans’ constitutional rights from them.

The First Amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” One way that the people petition the government is through our representatives. Taking away their policy-making authority for an extended period of time strips the people of that essential right.

These protests and lawsuits aren’t going away until these governors stop acting like autocrats. Whitmer, Walz and Evers think they’re above the will of the people because they want to do good as defined by them. The Constitution limits what governments can do, not what people can do.

Last Friday, Jay Inslee decided that protesting was “fomenting domestic rebellion”. Inslee, a former congressman, thinks that protesting his decisions, and the decisions of other governors, is harassment. If he can’t take the heat, he should get his rotting carcass out of the proverbial kitchen.

Here’s what Inslee said:

Inslee derided the president’s tweets as “unhinged rantings.” “His unhinged rantings and calls for people to ‘liberate’ states could also lead to violence,” Inslee’s statement said, according to Q13 FOX. “We’ve seen it before. The president is fomenting domestic rebellion and spreading lies even while his own administration says the virus is real and is deadly.’

What a total wimp. Do any of these Democrats have a spine? If they do, I haven’t detected it yet. This is part of the Democrats’ discredited playbook. Democrats insist that anything that a Republican says might “lead to violence.” When Gabby Giffords was shot, people immediately indicted Sarah Palin for the shooting. The shooting was done by Jared Loughner, a troubled young man with mental issues.

Democrats need to stop telling whoppers like this. Their incendiary language is disgusting, dishonest and disheartening. It’s got to stop immediately.

Inslee is one of those idiots that think the planet will die within the next 12 years if we don’t stop climate change. He’s essentially a socialist who thinks that government isn’t intrusive enough. If you follow his career, you’ll see that he’s just a cookie cutter politician. Apparently, Inslee’s brain is prohibited from accepting original thoughts.

Here’s what Gov. Inslee told Anderson Cooper:

First, you heard it. Gov. Inslee, one of the furthest left Democrats ever to run for president, said that his executive order was the law of the land. That’s stunning. Shelter-in-place orders aren’t laws. They’re guidelines that aren’t enforceable in the best of conditions. Each state constitution must comply with the US Constitution’s system of checks and balances. An executive order is just that — an order from the Executive Branch. There’s no check or balance in a system like that. The executive signs it. It’s filed. That’s it in terms of process. Further, shelter-in-place orders aren’t the law of the land because they violate the First Amendment because people have the right to protest. The Supreme Court ruled that speech is protected. Further, they ruled that political speech is the highest form of protected speech. Period. Anything that violates the Constitution is unenforceable. Period. If Inslee thinks that he can enforce laws that violate the Constitution, I’d love seeing him try. He’d get his butt kicked by the federal courts in a New York minute.

Later, Gov. Inslee pulls a stunt that’s commonplace with Democrats when he said “To have a president of the United States willfully try to inspire people of the United States to disobey the law and possibly violate the law with potentially fatal consequences is unbelievably irresponsible.” Is Inslee now interested in going into mindreading? Does he think that he’s the next Nostradamus? First, he’s wrong on the Constitution, then he’s making projections about possible maybes? That’s as solid as a house built on quicksand.

There’s a reason why this idiot dropped out early. He’s nuttier than AOC.

DFL Gov. Tim Walz has acted like he’s an autocrat that isn’t accountable to the people. Steve Drazkowski wants Gov. Walz to experience a little accountability. The DFL leadership is fighting to protect Gov. Walz because, well, Gov. Walz is a Democrat. Therefore, he must be protected at all costs. (At this point, the lion’s share of the Twin Cities media is obligated to either nod in agreement or genuflect and kiss Gov. Walz’s ring.)

Rep. Drazkowski isn’t nodding in agreement, genuflecting or kissing Gov. Walz’s ring. In fact, he’s attempting to restore constitutional sanity to the DFL majority in the Minnesota House. Obviously, Draz (that’s his nickname) has his hands full. Getting the DFL to listen to the Constitution is virtually impossible. Just ask Tucker Carlson about that:

Rep. Drazkowski is a warrior for the Constitution. He’s also a warrior of the principle of checks and balances. Here’s how he fought the fight for the people’s voice to be heard:

These orders do not make sense. People are allowed to go to a union meeting, but not a church service. They can get an abortion but not a kidney transplant. They can buy booze and medicinal marijuana, but they can’t camp in a state forest. If we don’t terminate the governor’s emergency powers, we will be ceding the authority of the Legislature, and the voice of the people, to one person. It is the Legislature’s role, as the voice of the people, to set state policy, not one chief executive.

Gov. Walz’s decisions have already devastated Minnesota’s economy. Thanks for acting unilaterally, Gov. Walz. Thanks for killing livelihoods and life dreams. I’m sure Minnesotans are satisfied.

If you look at our neighboring states, you will find that the states that have not instituted stay at home orders against their people have a death rate per million people due to COVID-19 equal to or lower than Minnesota’s. North Dakota, South Dakota and Iowa, states very much like ours that directly border Minnesota. They have decided to protect their people and their economy. We can do the same.

If you listen to Gov. Walz’s briefings, you won’t hear him talk often about the economy. Jan Malcolm, the commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Health, is present at all of the briefings. I don’t see the commissioner of DEED there often, though. That indicates Gov. Walz’s priorities.

There’s supposed to be a balancing act between public health and economic vitality. Gov. Walz has unilaterally, but with the DFL’s steadfast assistance, focused just on Minnesota’s health.

Based on this article, I’m betting that this coalition will fail:

Similar to the groups of governors on the East and West Coasts, the seven states (Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana, and Kentucky) will be looking at four main factors: sustained control of new infections and hospitalization, an enhanced ability to test and trace, a sufficient health care capacity to handle any surges, and best practices for social distancing in the workplace.

If these governors haven’t noticed, these are already part of President Trump’s blueprint of guidelines. They’re starting from a position of extreme caution. With the exception of Indiana and Ohio, these states are governed by pointy-headed liberals. Whitmer, Walz, Evers and Beshear aren’t the sharpest knives in the drawer. Pritzker isn’t a heavyweight, either.