Incorporation Insanity

I feel like I'm in a Twilight Zone episode. Yesterday, I was celebrating the RKTBA victory in McDonald v. Chicago in the chat room of The Ed Morrissey Show when the discussion turned to the crucial question of whether the Fourteenth Amendment had "incorporated" the Second Amendment to bind the states as well as the "Federal" government against infringing gun rights.

My reaction was described as "barking". I can't believe that learned men and women can read the same words I read and come to the conclusions they have reached. Either I'm barking mad, or they are.

I responded that the Second Amendment doesn't need to be "incorporated", because it applied to all levels of government ever since December 15, 1791. Just read its text:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

There isn't a word there saying that the "Federal" government can't infringe that right, but States can, unlike the First Amendment, which plainly opens with the phrase "Congress shall make no law..."

Somehow, the notion has become popular that the Constitution only defined the limitations on the powers of the "Federal" government, and did not limit the powers of the States. But that's complete nonsense: Article I, Section 10 explicitly restricts State power, Article IV is all about the States, and Article VI places limits on State laws.

The Tenth Amendment says:

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.

I see this as yet another case of the Constitution helping to define the powers of States: It leaves it to the people of each state to write their own constitutions to determine what powers to grant the state government, provided that nothing in the Constitution either gives that power to the "Federal" government or places it off-limits to the states.

Since the Tenth Amendment was proposed en masse with eleven others, including the Second, one could plausibly argue that its wording informs or restricts the meaning of the Second. In my analysis, the only glimmer of a theory under which the Second Amendment doesn't apply to the States is found here. This reading of the Tenth basically says "If the Constitution doesn't come right out and use the word 'state' in declaring a limit on government power, then that limit only applies to the 'Federal' government, not the states".

But I'm not buying that reading. When I read the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the original Articles of the Constitution, Federalist Papers, and the Bill of Rights, I come to the inescapable conclusion that when any of those documents speak of rights of the people that must not be infringed, they mean that those rights are superior to the powers of any government, and a government which infringes those rights, in doing so is violating its very reason to exist.

[Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full article.]So, am I barking mad, or is the judicial consensus so far from what our first Congress meant when they proposed the Second Amendment, and the states understood when they ratified it, that I just seem insane as a sane man must appear in a world gone mad?

Time Perspectives

Watch this, and think about what it's saying. Then think some more. This is about a fundamental problem that seems to be getting worse, not better.

Awesome campaign Ad

For some reason, I can't embed this:

America's new culture war: Free enterprise vs. government

Arthur C. Brooks had a column in yesterday's Washington Post (?!?).

Read it. Print it out. Email it to your friends. He nails it!

Money quotes:

"When it comes to support for free enterprise, we are essentially a 70(for)-30(against) nation.

"Free enterprise brings happiness; redistribution does not. The reason is that only free enterprise brings earned success."

"The 70 percent majority, meanwhile, believes that ingenuity and hard work should be rewarded."

"What matters most to Americans is the commitment to principle, not the exercise of power. The electorate did not repudiate free enterprise in 2008; it simply punished an unprincipled Republican Party."

NJ Teacher's union forced to take back seat to kids

"When New Jersey teachers union members refused to make room for students in a legislative committee hearing, the chairman took the meeting to the students."

Read it all.

Wall. Rifles. NO blindfolds!

Everybody Draw Mohammed Day

I'm not that much good at drawing, so mine's in the form of a rebus:

And yes, it's midnight GMT, so we're joining the party.

Poor Muslims aren't allowed to have any Ham. You know, I pity them.

Border Security is not a Laughing Matter

Reason TV: The Downfall of "Downfall" Parodies

An Entrepreneur and the Minimum-Wage

by Don Boudreaux on April 29, 2010

A.G. (who asks me to use, in this post, only his initials) is a regular reader of Cafe Hayek. He’s 28 years old and is an entrepreneur in Charlotte, North Carolina. His firm employs 25 people, 21 of whom are low-skilled workers. A.G. just sent this memo to his employees:

To All Team Members:

The schedule for next week has been posted. You may notice that hours have been cut back on your schedule. This is across the board, not just you. I don’t want anyone to think they’ve done something wrong to deserve a cut in hours, so I wanted to explain why it’s happening.

There are a couple of reasons for this:

Go here and read the whole thing.

Crist-icism Down the Memory Hole

Until earlier today, http://charliecrist.com/2010/04/crist-campaign-rubio-camp-prefers-baseless-rumors-over-talking-about-his-record/ went to this page. Here's the money quote:

“To put these rumors to rest once and for all, as we have said countless times before, Governor Crist is running for the United States Senate as a Republican. He will not run as an Independent or as a No Party Affiliation.

“The Governor is proud of his conservative credentials and stands firmly behind the principles of limited government and more personal freedom, the bedrock values of the Republican Party. He is proud to be a member of the Party of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan.

“This should completely and utterly put to rest any of the unfounded rumors coming from the Rubio campaign that Governor Crist would run as anything other than the Republican that he is.”

Now, strangely, the first link produces this:

Page Not Found

We're sorry, but the page you are looking for cannot be found. If you need more help, please use the search form to your left in the sidebar.

Sorry, Charlie, but you can't just make inconvenient prior statements disappear down the Memory Hole. The voters will remember in November.

I voted Democrat because...

Read the whole thing.

My vote for the number one reason:

"I voted Democrat because it was easier than thinking."

Condell: What do you know about Islam?

Smitty found this one via Jihad Watch:

Reason TV: I Am Free Enterprise

A reminder of what the creeping corporatism of the regime will destroy:

You Picked a Fine Time To Lead Us

I have a warm spot in my heart for parody...

Awesomeness!

credit

Anti-Administration Protestors Threaten Violence

(NSFW video)

Irony: A Pictorial Definition

Maria Conchita Alonso Rips Sean Penn a New One

Dear Sean, WHY?

Even though I have great respect for your artistic talent, I was appalled by a recent television interview where you vigorously showed support for the regime of Hugo Chavez. Therefore, I've decided to set the record straight for you regarding the Chavez regime, supporting my case based not only on my political ideologies, but on proven facts you choose to ignore. Otherwise, I believe your position would be different.

Being born in Cuba, a country where freedom of speech is non-existent, it's startling to observe how Venezuela, where I was happily raised, is fast becoming Cuba's mirror image: Dismantling of fundamental democratic rights deserved by its people and citizens of the world.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/maria-conchita-alonso/2010/03/25/open-letter-sean-penn#ixzz0jdI2gW6w

Day by Day: Declarative

Chris Muir tries Bill's challenge to write out the words of the Declaration of Independence by hand:


You are reading Day by Day, well, day by day, aren't you?

Every Picture Tells a Story, Don't it?

Goy sets the record straight about the horrors of "the last eight years".
Bookmark this one. It's a keeper!