Those whose arguments are empty of fact are usually full of shit. --David Porter
Get it out there. Call, write, talk, inform.

Friday, September 28, 2007

Why does Senator Cornyn hate the United States Constitution?

The ad in the New York Times is not hate speech, nor does it advocate the overthrow of the U.S. government. The ad is pure, unadulterated, Constitutionally-protected, patriotic, freedom of speech.

A United States senator should be proud and applaud those who cherish and take advantage of the freedoms that American's have (and still are) fought and died for. Why, instead, do Cornyn and the other Constitution-haters, try to shame, stifle, and generally have disgust for those freedom's as evidenced by the introduction of a resolution about's ad?

This is not why we the people elect politicians to the U.S. Senate.

Inherent Contempt

200 years ago, Congress would try people just as a court of law would. The sergeant-at-arms had men and weapons at his disposal to bring people in, but the practice lapsed because it became a nuisance and has not been used for 70 years, but it remains available. Our Congress would be utterly remiss to not use this power. It is called "inherent contempt."

The Congress should initiate inherent contempt charges against Harriet Miers without delay. The Congress does not need to wait for the US Attorney for Washington, DC to bring charges. Additionally, Miers does not deserve a courtesy call. She flat out refused to come before Congress when she was subpoenaed, a direct rejection of Congress' power, and therefore a textbook case of contempt.