Patriots' Corner

Limited Government - Unlimited Rights by RoseAnn Salanitri

2010-06-25T13:47:00.000-07:00

The Tea Party movement in the United States is raising awareness and inspiring conversations regarding that very extraordinary document we call our Constitution. The Committee to Recall Senator Robert Menendez (the Committee) has been the catalyst for many of these conversations as arguments both for and against recall can be read all over the internet and in many media venues across the nation.

The Committee’s explanation that they have elected to initiate the recall against Senator Menendez due to his unconstitutional votes on healthcare and illegal immigration is often met with confusion. Additionally, many also believe that the recall itself is unconstitutional. Therefore, it has become apparent that a more detailed explanation is in order.

Our Founding Fathers wrote two extraordinary documents which serve as the basis of our system of government. The first was our Declaration of Independence, which acts as our mission statement and the second is our Constitution, which acts as our by-laws. Our mission statement describes our heart and what makes us unique, while our by-laws describe the do’s and don’ts of how our federal government operates.

The Declaration of Independence clearly asserts that our rights come from God and not government. It states:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable
rights, that among these rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness.”

It goes on to say that the purpose of government is secure our God-given rights:

“That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among them…”

And that government receives its rights from the consent of the governed:

“… deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

This unique perspective established the basis of designing a system where the powers of government are limited and defined but the rights of citizens are unlimited and not necessarily defined. Therefore, it is important to realize that any argument from silence concerning the Constitution should support the rights of the citizens or the states and does not support undefined powers of the federal government. The only rights given to the federal government are defined and cannot exceed those written within the Constitution. These government powers are referred to as “enumerated (or specified) powers,” and apply only to the federal government. The states, however, are free to adopt laws and establish powers as they see fit. In other words, restrictions were put on the federal government.

Understanding these principles is paramount to understanding the constitutional argument of the Committee. If our rights come from God and our Constitution limits the powers of the government, then it is reasonable to argue that since the right to recall is not mentioned in the Constitution (one way or another), it’s absence should support the Committee’s right to recall. Again, recall is not mentioned in the Constitution, which only defines how the federal government functions and limits its power. In the State of New Jersey the citizens voted by 76.2% to amend their state constitution to include recall in 1993, after Governor Jim Florio angered the citizens of New Jersey by raising taxes, which he vowed not to do while campaigning. The citizens of New Jersey understood that elections gave them the right to choose their representatives but recalls gave them the tool to keep their representatives accountable. According to the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution, the citizens of New Jersey were clearly exercising their constitutional right to state sovereignty.

When the Constitution was submitted for ratification in 1787, the states were fearful that certain rights were so important that they had to be specifically spelled out. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton thought it was unnecessary to spell these rights out because the federal government’s powers were limited. They further feared that if any rights were specified that it could be argued that those that were not specified were not protected. The Ninth and Tenth Amendments were suggested as the solution to the problem.

The Ninth Amendment states:

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

In other words, this Amendment clearly states that just because certain rights are not specifically defined in the Constitution, does not mean that they don’t exist.

The Tenth Amendment reads:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people.”

Once again, our founders went through great pains to be sure it was understood that the people of this country and their respective states retained all sovereignty in matters not specifically belonging to the federal government and defined within the Constitution. All restrictions were placed on the federal government and not the states. The citizens and the states retained all other rights. This is a foundational principle of our Constitutional Republic.

While it was exceedingly important to our founders to limit the federal government, they also understood that in order to operate effectively, the federal government had to possess certain rights in order to carry out functions of a national nature. Article One, Section Eight lists these powers. They are to be uniform throughout the United States and are for the purposes of providing for the “general welfare” and “common defense.” They are as follows:

1. To regulate interstate and international commerce;
2. To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization;
3. To establish uniform laws on the subject of Bankruptcies;
4. To coin money and establish its value;
5. To fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
6. To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting
7. To establish post offices and post roads;
8. To promote the progress of science & useful arts by supplying
copyrights & patents;
9. To establish Federal Courts;
10. To govern the District of Columbia;
11. To purchase real estate for needful buildings;
12. To make laws necessary to carry out the execution of the defined
powers;
13. To define and punish Maritime and international crimes;
14. To declare war;
15. To make rules for and to fund the Military Services.

When the Committee refers to Senator Menendez’s votes for things like healthcare being “unconstitutional”, they are referring to the enumerated powers listed above and claim that these powers do not provide for government-run healthcare or a host of other usurpations that have developed over the past several years.

Thomas Jefferson once said, “Whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.” The Committee believes that the out-of-control government we are now experiencing has assumed undelegated powers, and is therefore unauthoritative and should be void and of no force. It is the underlying principle behind the recall movement and the Committee’s desire to restore government limits and state sovereignty.

To further make the point, below are listed just a few of Senator Menendez’s votes that the Committee doesn’t believe are authorized under the Constitution:

• Voted not to notify parents of minors who get out of state
abortions
• Voted for partial birth abortion
• Voted for human cloning
• Voted that tax money should pay for contraception
• Voted for healthcare to pay for abortions
• Voted to send federal funds to “sanctuary cities”
• Voted not to declare English as the official US language
• Voted not to build the fence along the Mexican border
• Voted not to send the National Guard to protect our southern border
• Voted to give illegal aliens social security
• Voted to give permanent residence to “undocumented workers”
• Voted not to enforce immigration laws
• Voted to confiscate firearms
• Voted to give the children of illegal aliens college tuition money
• Voted to keep the marriage penalty tax
• Voted to continue TARP funds
• Voted to increase national public debt
• Voted to develop a “global” strategy to eliminate poverty
• Voted to protect the rights of terrorists
• Voted to apply the Geneva Convention to terrorists
• Voted for government-run healthcare

It is a bit ironic that Senator Menendez would try to protect his career by hiding behind the Constitution when it is apparent from his voting record that the Constitution is of little value to him. Make no mistake about it, we are in a battle whose outcome will determine whether or not a nation of the people, by the people and for the people can survive upon this earth. It is our hope that this article has answered some of your questions and that you will join us in this historic battle to preserve our liberties and freedoms for ourselves and for generations to come.

Old news/ New news

2010-04-27T06:13:00.000-07:00

Within the last two weeks I have received numereous e-mails that are over a year old, but are being treated as new happenings. We really have to address this issue. People, there is more than enough coming out of Washington on any given day that can, and should, be passed on to our fellow members so that we don't keep recycling old news. And, sadly, some of this old news is just as false today as it was when it was first circulated. Please, check your sources and go to any online verification site you are comfortable with to make sure you are not just recycling.

Game On!

2010-01-27T13:29:00.000-08:00

On January 22nd lawyers representing The Committee to Recall Senator Robert Menendez filed their brief supporting the Recall initiative. The court requested that the same brief be served to Senator Menace--Menendez. In an article dated January 26th that was posted on NJ.com and Politico, Senator Menendez, on behalf of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee that he heads, revealed his strategy to drive a wedge between moderate voters and tea-party-type conservatives. See: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/32003.html.

Since the recall effort was initiated by “tea-party-type conservatives” (myself included), it is probably logical to assume that we finally got the Senator’s attention-something we couldn’t do in a summer filled with faxes, petitions, rallies, phone calls, and letters. While his Democratic Party constituents may view his strategy as a way to preserve their party and their careers, others may see it as a transparent effort to preserve his own career by dividing the movement that seeks to unseat him. It’s the old “divide and conquer” philosophy that has worked well in historical battles, and it reveals the heart of a man who is more interested in political preservation than listening to the will of the people he represents. The question remains whether or not this strategy will work here in NJ.

One thing we can be certain of, an alliance between TEA Party patriots and the Republican Party would be a force that most likely would defeat Menendez at the ballot box. While many within the TEA Party movement are just as disappointed with the Republican Party as they are with the Democratic Party, I’ll refer to another old philosophy: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Whether Republican, Democrat, Independent, Constitutionalist, Conservative, Libertarian, or any other affiliation, we need to keep our focus on the challenge before us. We need to unite against a common enemy elitist who has undermined our prosperity and trampled over our Constitution. We can sort out our differences later.

On behalf of the Committee to Recall Senator Robert Menendez, I ask all NJ patriots to join forces to defeat our common enemy and restore the principles of government that prospered us and protected our liberties. Massachusetts (and America by extension) may have claimed a victory with the election of Senator Scott Brown – now it’s our turn to send the elitists packing – and victory is within our grasp!

Education is Key

2010-01-25T18:30:00.000-08:00

I am a nanny for two young children, aged 7 and 9. Already, their perception of America is twisted - the public schools simply aren't telling the tale of America. Their version is twisted, watered-down, and corrupted. No wonder that by the time the average American reaches their teen-age years, they're disenchanted with their country. Not only are we used to taking our 'liberties for granted,' but by the time we're becoming old enough to vote and grow truly interested in politics, we're chock-full of the problems with the US government, and of the bonuses of other forms of government, like communism and its ilk.

It is imperative that we do our best to educate people about the true story of the United States, and to show them the true vision that our Founding Fathers had for our country. It is important that teens and kids can see that our government isn't idealistic, or simply a dream. They have to see that our country is worth fighting for, is worth taking some heat from their friends for, is worth the time spent learning about it.

And that all begins with parents, grandparents, and family members. Stay on top of what you're kids are learning in school; make sure to point out the outright fallacies or flaws in the teachings. Show them documents authored by our Founding Fathers; let them see the real, glorious vision that the US is - and most of all, let them see that the vision is obtainable, as long as they are willing to participate, and to fight for the government they want. This is a government run for the people, by the people - but in order for it to work, the people must be educated, and the people have to want it.

After all, every truly strong political leader knows that the key to a country is its youth. And if we can get the youth on our side, if we can get them to the point where they will purposely talk with their friends and share their views, if we can inspire pride in the USA in the youth to such a degree - well, then, we'll have won the 'battle,' and perhaps even the 'war.'

America Rising - With Special Kudos to the States of Nebraska and Louisiana

2010-01-08T10:04:00.000-08:00

If you have been following the Health Care debacle, you are well aware of the special negotiations and back door deals that have been stricken to impose the liberal ideologically driven health care bill upon the American people. Two state senators in particular exemplify the worst of what has befallen our great nation–elitism and career insurance. While elitism is easy to understand, being the attitude of “I’m superior to you and know better than you; therefore, my opinion should not be questioned”–career insurance is a more subtle character flaw. It pretends to do what’s good for those it represents, when all the while it is really only concerned with getting re-elected and furthering its own career.

Admittedly, I don’t know much about either Senator Ben Nelson from Nebraska or Senator Mary Landrieu from Louisiana, but I can tell you something about the patriots that live in their states. Both Senators fell victim to the temptations and pressures the White House and the democratic congress were imposing upon them-or were they merely more adept at making deals? The truth is that we simply don’t know their motivation (or their weakness, as the case may be). It is possible they gave in to pressure; it is also possible they struck a good deal for their state in hopes of bringing home the bacon and thereby securing their subsequent elections with their constituents. However, they didn’t count on the integrity, patriotism, and constitutional understanding of their citizens.

In the good state of Nebraska, Senator Ben Nelson’s poll numbers have exponentially declined, rending a death blow to his chances for re-election; and in the good state of Louisiana, the Secretary of State has just approved the petitions to recall Senator Mary Landrieu. These states deserve the admiration of the rest of us, as they rose above personal gratification and special sweetheart deals to support the greater good of our country. In other words, they didn’t sell out! Let this be an example to all of us and to the elitists in Congress. We the People can reclaim and restore the principles of republicanism at its finest if we look beyond our own short term interests. We need good men and women in congress and in all branches of government. Men and women who aren’t afraid to make good decisions based on what is right- and not on what might ingratiate them with their base (like the bridge nowhere in Alaska). The New World Order and the socialistic liberals may have thought America was in their grasp-that we would be willing to surrender our autonomy and sell out our country and our ideals for free healthcare (like we believe that really exists), or any other pot of gold at the end of the illusionary rainbow, but they didn’t count on patriots-the likes of which live in Nebraska, and Louisiana, and I’m happy to say in my home state of New Jersey. The truth is America and our ideals of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are not dead–we are rediscovering and recommitting ourselves to the principles that made this country great in the past and will prosper it once again in the future – as long as we remain strong. Therefore I say – Long live America!

Justice or Revenge?

2009-11-15T15:53:00.000-08:00

There has been much chatter on the news and on the blogs about President Obama’s decision to send 9/11 mastermind and co-conspirators to New York City for trial. Attorney General, Eric Holder, announced and defended this decision by pretending to take the high road – offering to take the heat this abysmal decision would inevitably generate. Taking the Attorney General at face value, one might think he was noble and standing up for his perverted version of justice. After all, doesn’t everyone deserve the privileges United States citizens enjoy – as if it was some kind of God-given right? Shouldn’t these war criminals that admittedly plotted the murders of innocent victims be afforded protection under our Constitution? Eric Holder and our President seem more concerned with the rights of these terrorists than the rights of the victims and their families. To add insult to injury, this farce parading itself as justice will unravel just blocks from the World Trade Towers massacre. And if history repeats itself, we can expect a swell of new terrorist recruits who are inspired and motivated by the publicity and promulgation of terror ideologies these trials will display.
Citizens and those who were in leadership in New York City at the time of the massacre, along with surviving victims and the families of those who did not survive, all voiced their protest to this travesty. However, the administration turned deaf ears to their protests – just like they turned deaf ears to the Tea Party protests. But should we expect something different from a President who bowed before the King of Saudi Arabia?

As if all this isn’t bad enough, it is hard to dismiss the possibility that the Obama administration is more interested in putting the Bush administration on trial than affording justice to these self-professed war criminals. It is the only thing these dastardly libs have to gain. We all should realize at this point that our dear President is intolerant of any criticism. Remember Joe the Plumber - just an average citizen who spoke out against the principles of Marxism? Joe was persecuted mercilessly by Obama lackeys. Coincidentally, President Bush came out of retirement this week and gently spoke out against the Obama financial policies. And coincidentally, scarcely a day or two later, the current administration announces that these trials will be held. I don’t know about you, but I don’t much believe in coincidences. For the last year or two, those in the spotlight have been bending over backwards to give the President the benefit of every doubt. And like many who bend over backwards, they have gotten a swift kick in the posterior. What kind of president disregards the wishes and well being of his citizens in favor of those who assaulted his country in a most egregious manner? Certainly not one that is a patriot.Justice or revenge? You decide.

Taxation Without Representation

2009-11-15T15:51:00.000-08:00

Taxation without representation isn’t a new phrase. It’s one we usually associate with the Revolutionary War. However, in 2009, it may be time to start shouting this protest phrase once again. As is the case with the recent Tea Parties, which derive their name from our founders’ protest against high tea taxes levied by England, some things old seem to be new again. And – as was the case prior to the Revolutionary War - the people living on this continent in this country are once again being taxed without proper representation. This time, however, is more insidious since we all erroneously believe that we do have representation in the form of elected officials. But do we?

Anyone who has read a recent newspaper, watched a news show, or listened to talk radio knows that the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, is a Democrat. As Speaker of the House, Ms. Pelosi enjoys a certain amount of power – power that she isn’t afraid to use and power that she most certainly does abuse. Among her most recent abuses is her recently discovered “lock out” tool. Ms. Pelosi has discovered that she can (and does) lock out Republican congressmen and women from deliberation over the highly controversial Healthcare Bill. In the 5th District in NJ, as in other districts around the country, our congressman is a Republican, which means the 5th District of NJ was not represented during the Healthcare deliberations. Ms. Pelosi also tried to lock out protesters from entering the Capital Building last week as 30,000 citizens gathered to speak to their representatives. Some persisted and managed to access the Capital building in spite of Ms. Pelosi’s efforts. But nonetheless, Ms. Pelosi did her best to separate citizens from their representatives.

If Ms. Pelosi denies us or our representatives from participating in our government, then those living in those districts that have been deprived of representation, are paying federal taxes without having representation. This is nothing other than taxation without representation and this type of elitist attitude by those in government is what inspired the Revolutionary War. Perhaps it’s time for another revolution or perhaps we can still snatch what is left of our Constitutional rights from the hands of these despicable ideologues who have high jacked our system of government and totally disregarded the Constitution that they swore to uphold and protect. It seems to me that we have a few options left: demand Nancy Pelosi be removed as Speaker of the House or stop paying federal taxes until our representation is restored. While these actions may seem radical, they pale compared to the radical actions exercised in our Capital building today.

2009-08-24T11:00:00.000-07:00

Charity Begins at Home - but Not for BO

Growing up we often heard the phrase, do as I say not as I do. We may giggle when we hear these words, but it is not a laughing matter. People who profess one ideology while practing another are nothing more than self-delusional hypocrites. RoseAnn 1:1 states: "Hypocrites you will have with you always." It is an unfortunate part of human nature, but it is even more objectionable when men and women who are supposed to represent the best of who we are and who we aspire to be, turn out to be hypocrites extraordinaire. These are people who make sweeping grandiose statements that are usually not accompanied by their actions. Chief among these despicable elitists is our 44th President.

Recently a friend who wishes to remain anonymous, sent me the statistics about our President's charitable giving history. I think you will find it interesting. In an excerpt from a Conservapedia article, he writes:

In August of 2008 the NY Daily News reported the following concerning Obama and his
half- brother, George Obama:

"Barack Obama wants to live int he White House - but his youngest half-brother lives
in the poorhouse.

George Obama, one of the candidate's seven living half-siblings, lives on pennies a
month in a hut in Africa, the Italian edition of Vanity Fair revealed.

'He (George Obama) lives on the outskirts of Nairobi in a 65-square-foot shack...

I live here on less than a dollar a month,' he (George Obama) said."

Asked by Harry Smith from CBS about Obama leaving the campaign to visit his ailing grand-
mother, Obama replied, 'Yeah, well the -- I think most people understand that if you're not
caring for your family, then you're probably not the kind of person who's going to be caring
for other people."

I guess either BO doesn't consider his half-brother George family, or this is just another instance of BO misspeaking (the rest of us call it "lying").

In his Conservapedia article, my friend reported that BO gave less than 2% in the years 2000-2004, even though he earned $250,000 per year. In the years 2000-2002, BO gave less than 1% of his income to charity (some of the same charities he will compel us to contribute to through taxes - even those we do not morally agree with). Since becoming a national figure, that amount has jumped to 6%. Below are the percentages my friend reported BO contributed to charities while he was earning $250,000/year:

2000: 0.9%
2001: 0.5%
2002: 0.4%
2003: 1.4%
2004: 1.2%
2005: 4.7%
2006: 6.1%

The American people are the most generous people in the world - but the same rules don't seem to apply to the elitists who supposedly represent us in government. The argument of "give your money to the poor or needy" isn't a new one. Judas Iscariot, the man who betrayed Jesus, was an apostle who controlled the money box. He made a similar argument when Mary used expensive perfume to wash the feet of Jesus before He was crucified. Judas said that the perfume could have been sold and the money given to the poor. The Bible tells us that he had no intention of giving the money to the poor but wanted to keep it for himself.

It seems there is nothing new under the sun. As I said at the beginning of this blog, hypocrites you will have with you always. BO may be many things, but as far as I am concerned, he certainly qualifies as a hypocrite - at least when I'm feeling charitable that is.

Nationalized Healthcare

2009-08-17T08:20:00.000-07:00

Bottom line, nationalizing healthcare is Unconstitutional under the equal protection clause, the 9th,10th, 11th and 14th Amendments.

Far from debating page by page, as the congressmen get up to sell this snake oil, the people should be clear and firm in their demand that the whole nationalization plan be tossed.

And this should be but the first volley.

Demand a repeal of the laws that have nationalized banks, auto manufactures, stimulous, etc. on the same grounds. From there, the repeal of each unconsitutional legislation, a process which Congress has escalated since the signing of NAFTA on the same grounds.

DEMAND Congress to DEMAND consitutional oversight/balance of power. These Czars answerable ONLY to the president are unconsitutional and we MUST get them removed.

Not ask, DEMAND. Pelosi, Napolitano, Obama ARE right. From their POV we ARE terrorists, we have the doomsday weapon that terrorizes them and against which they are defenseless.

That weapon is the Consitution of the USA. USE IT! WE MUST protect the Consitution that protects us.

My Cross Isn't Broken

2009-08-07T17:14:00.000-07:00

By now you must have seen the clip of Nancy Pelosi saying tea party patriots go to town hall meetings sporting swastikas. As a committed Christian, I strongly object to that - the cross I carry isn't twisted. However, Ms. Pelosi's view of the world is.

Aren't you getting tired of all the name calling and insults? I guess that's easier for them to do than defend their politics. Nowadays the left can even find something to criticize if you dress with a certain amount of class. If so, you are called a Brooks Brothers Protester - and this from elitists - the very same people who praise Michelle Obama's extravagant wardrobe choices, including her $6,000 clutch purse she wore in Russia. These are the same people who criticized the automaker CEO's for traveling to Washington to ask for a bailout, but they travel the world in private jets, some of which have been paid for with your taxpayers.

Let's face it, nothing we can do or say will make a favorable impact on these people. Their logic is non-existent and they see the world through their elitist eyes, which entitles them to the very same things they say you should be sacrificing. This is why they exempt themselves from the Health Care plan they are attempting to force upon us. And it is why men like Al Gore can travel the world telling everyone how they need to conserve energy and reduce their carbon footprint when he consumes more than the average person uses in a month...but he's Al Gore and he's entitled - but us peons - we're not! Can't help but think about Marie Antoinette saying to the starving masses as she feasted with her fellow elitists, "Let them eat cake." Too bad Al Gore and his cronies don't remember what happened to Marie Antoinette!

Histories lessons can be provactive. Remember the Roman Empire and their elitist Senators. Many believe these legislators were so out of touch that it was the main reason Rome fell. Al Gore, Nanci Pelosi, and the rest of the powers that be can't seem to learn or refuse to learn their lessons from history. This means the future of our country rests on the shoulders of We the People and our resolve to restore the principles of government that secured our liberties and provided an environment conducive to prosperity.

We are fighting for the future of our country and all the libs can seem to do is call us names and mock every honest and sincere argument we raise. But our day is fast approaching - we call it "Election Day" and it's the day we remind them who really owns this country!

A Few Things You Might Not Know About Health Care

2009-08-04T17:15:00.000-07:00

Our elected officials might not be reading the proposed Health Care Bill, but many of our citizens have - and what they're finding will make your hair stand on end. Here's a few of the more obscure and little discussed points:

You may know that aliens - illegal or otherwise - will be entitlted to the same benefits Joe Citizen is entitled to, but did you know that aliens will not be required to pay any taxes?For them free health care is truly free - but not for our own citizens.
Employers will be required to supply part time employees and their families health care insurance. Wonder what that will do for the unemployment rate?
The government will require you have a national ID that records your health history.
The government will have full electronic access to all your finances via your bank accounts and any other means you may have. They will control what you buy and sell.
Doctors investments and property will be subject to approval.
Not put quite this way, but in essence your life will be pro-rated (like tires) and the amount of services you receive will be based on the number of expected years you have left.

In the words of Jerry Sienfeld - Yadda, Yadda, Yadda.

Looking at his deeds and not his words...

2009-08-04T17:01:00.000-07:00

Health Care? Perhaps if you have Frankenstian tendencies. But what would you expect from a President whose Job Stimulus program increases unemployment, and whose non-involvement in the auto industry means replacing their CEO and having his staff call that CEO every day?

If this President tells you there will be peace in the city - run for the hills.!

This is a man whose Science Czar wrote a book supporting population control and advocating taking babies from teenage mothers. Our President is a man that voted that babies born as a result of a botched abortion should be left somewhere to die - denied medical attention. He is a man that purports to have a heart to take care of the poor and indigent but has an aunt living in public housing in Boston.

So, is this a man you would trust with your health and the health of your family?