Main Menu

Constitutional Fundamentalism

Dr. Conspiracy

Dr. Conspiracy

Fundamentalism refers to a belief in, and strict adherence to a set of basic principles (often religious in nature), a reaction to perceived doctrinal compromises with modern social and political life. Wikipedia.

The idea of using the category fundamentalism to describe some of the constitutional discussions tangential to Obama Conspiracy Theories came to me after reading an article about ConstitutionWatch.org filing a lawsuit saying Hillary Clinton was ineligible to be Secretary of State. Here’s the section from the Constitution:

No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time: and no person holding any office under the United States, shall be a member of either House during his continuance in office.

The Washington Post reports:

In Clinton’s case, during her current term in the Senate, which began in January 2007, cabinet salaries were increased from $186,600 to $191,300. This situation has arisen before, most famously in the case called “The Saxbe Fix,” but it involves a controversial, somewhat tortured reading of the Sacred Document.

That “fix” came in 1973, when President Nixon nominated Ohio Sen. William Saxbe (R) to be attorney general after the famed “Saturday Night Massacre” during the Watergate scandal. Saxbe was in the Senate in 1969 when the AG’s pay was raised.

Congress lowered Saxbe’s salary to pre-1969 levels, and Saxbe took office. But the Constitutional fundamentalists, ignoring the obvious intent of the Constitution to prevent a particular abuse, cling to the letter of the document with an outcome never intended.

Another case is the humorous argument that George Washington was ineligible to be president.

A mindless literalism appears among the nObama when they say that an 18th century Swiss jurist de Vattel’s work, Le Droit des Gens. ou Principes de la Loi Naturelle, appliques a la conduite & aux affaires des Nations & des Souverains, is written into the US Constitution because the phrase “The Law of Nations” appears therein (and that is a translation of a bit of Vattel’s French title).

, , , , , , , , , , ,

18 Responses to Constitutional Fundamentalism

  1. avatar
    bogus info February 3, 2009 at 5:24 pm #

    Dr. C.,

    I wish you would make a file for “patriots rantings and ravings.” Here is one example:

    Michael // Feb 3, 2009 at 11:29 pm

    Dear Dr. Taitz,
    I just got off the phone with Congressman Ron Paul’s legislative assistant, Norman Stillman (SP?), who confirmed what you already had told me, and I was unable to get a written response from RP about via e-mail, which is that indeed Congressman RP refused to accept the challenge put before him and Congress to mount or demand a FULL SCALE INVESTIGATION by Congress or the SCOTUS or FBI demanding “definitive proof” of Barry Soetoro’s aka Barack Obama’s “natural born citizen” eligibility 2 B POTUS!
    Norman went on and on about how RP’s office looked at and listened to enough evidence (i.e. what was told them by Sec. of State of HI and the certification of live birth posted online on Obama’s website) to conclude that the matter was closed and NOT worth investigating and people like you or me are NEVER satisfied no matter what comes out!
    Well, I got my answer confirmed, and all it did was upset me further and motivate me all the more to help expose this fraud and contempt for our Constitution and demand the “definitive proof” We the People deserve 2 SEE be brought to the table now or MASSIVE CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE will be the answer.
    We the People need to TAKE BACK our government NOW B 4 this NWO patsy puppet POTUS railroads their final FASCIST agenda through Congress @ our expense!
    We the People need to get the MILITARY 2 file MASSIVE ARTICLE 185’s NOW!
    We the People need to demand the REMOVAL of this POTUS NOW!
    We the People need to exercise our 1st Amendment rights while we still have them as We the People and Bob Schulz have already done (although completely ignored or “dismissed w/o comment” by the SCOTUS) and file MASSIVE Petitions 4 Redress of Grievance NOW!
    We the People need to file MASSIVE FOIA requests demanding the “definitive proof” of this man’s “natural born citizen” eligiblity (i.e. birth certificate with obstetrician’s name and hospital’s name).
    We the People need to UNITE as ONE as never B 4 and TAKE BACK our country.
    Those that will NOT lead need to step down or step aside B 4 they are trampled by the 2nd rEVOLUTION!
    Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom as U know.
    Please hold fast and continue fighting 4 freedom Orly!
    GBU,
    Michael

    Basically what they told him was to “buzz off.” Something I suspect this bunch will hear more frequently in the days to come!

  2. avatar
    bogus info February 3, 2009 at 5:53 pm #

    Is this factual?

    February 2, 2009
    NEW HAMPSHIRE TALKS CIVIL WAR AGAINST FEDS!
    The New Hampshire state legislature took an unbelievably bold step today by introducing a resolution to declare certain actions by the federal government to completely totally void and warning that certain future acts will be viewed as a “breach of peace” with the states themselves that risks “nullifying the Constitution.”
    This act by New Hampshire is a clear warning to the federal government that they could face being stripped of their power by the States (presumably through civil war!
    The remarkable document outlines with perfect clarity, some basics long forgotten. For instance, it reminds Congress “That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever;. . . . . therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force;”
    Federal gun crime laws? Void. Federal drug crime laws? Void. The gazzillion other federal criminal laws that deal with anything other than the specific enumerated crimes? ALL VOID.
    One would think that if any lawyer anywhere in the entire country was worth his salt, all federal criminal trials would have ended years ago. This seems to prove that most lawyers are dullards.
    New Hampshire deals a complete death blow to the pending federal hate crimes legislation by pointing out “That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; . . . . .”
    Later in the Resolution, New Hampshire makes clear what the feds are now risking if they proceed further: The removal of all powers from the federal government by the States!
    Quoting directly from the Resolution: “That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:
    I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.
    II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
    III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.
    IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.
    V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.
    VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and
    That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually.”
    I have reported on thisblog for quite some time that we here in the United States are heading toward Civil War. Many of you told me I was a nut for thinking that.
    The simple fact is that we are long overdue for another Rebellion in this nation and I heartily endorse the idea of having one again very soon; preferably starting THIS year!
    We must stop our federal government dead in its tracks because it is out of control and very dangerous. If stopping them means attacking them and destroying them by force, then so be it.
    Read the full New Hampshire Resolution directly from the State Government Web Site, Here
    Posted by HalTurnerShow.com at 2/02/2009 09:13:00 PM

  3. avatar
    Jez February 3, 2009 at 6:53 pm #

    It’s on the Legislative site.
    http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html

  4. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 3, 2009 at 7:03 pm #

    Typical states rights rhetoric (not to say rhetoric is bad). But interpreting it as heading towards Civil war is silly. The resolution hasn’t passed (debate on the 5th).

    I must say, I appear almost psychic, dusting off that Constitutional Fundamentalism article I had on the shelf this morning.

    But some organization must be behind the publicity because I got an email spam about this at work this afternoon, and I NEVER get stuff like this at work.

    Whatcha bet this is a feature article on Orly within 24 hours?

  5. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 3, 2009 at 7:27 pm #

    If they tried evidence instead of demands, they would get a a lot farther. Sorry, I forgot. They don’t have any evidence.

    I just had a strange thought… what would you call someone who mindlessly follows Orly Taitz and does her bidding? Could you call them O-Bots? Nononononono, that’s MINE. Or how about ?-Bots, hmmm?

    I’m a little O-Bot
    Short and Stout…

  6. avatar
    bogus info February 3, 2009 at 7:48 pm #

    Oh yea. It was on The Betrayal in the “comments”.

    VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

    During the Presidental election, it was in the news that a young boy went with his Dad to a “gun show”. With the Dad and Instructor right there, they allowed the young boy to shoot one of those assualt weapons. According to the news release, the young boy could not handle the weapon and killed himself. Was a blip on the radar screen in the news. I’m all for having guns but with those guns come responsibility.

    Think this Resolution will pass?

  7. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 3, 2009 at 7:55 pm #

    A few years back someone (whose name I won’t mention) was a freelance reporter for The State (the capital city newspaper in Columbia SC) and he told me that seen bunkers full of artillery near a SC town (the name of which I won’t mention) that is staggering.

  8. avatar
    Patrick McKinnion February 3, 2009 at 9:56 pm #

    It’s on her new site alright

    http://defendourfreedoms.us/2009/02/03/nh-revolution.aspx

  9. avatar
    bogus info February 3, 2009 at 10:11 pm #

    Comments from that article. I suspect Orly is racist big time.

    2/3/2009 6:48 PM AnonNoMore wrote:
    Hi Orly,
    “I’m a bit disturbed that you would post a link to Hal Turner’s blog as he is a white supremacist, anti-Semite and advocate of violence. If you read through his other posts you will see that he is open and unashamed about his beliefs and often says terrible things about people of color/Jews. I think it sends the wrong message to link to him from your blog as I’m sure your visitors want to defend everyone’s freedoms, not just white folks.”

    Thank you for your time
    Reply to this
    2/3/2009 6:58 PM Defend Our Freedoms Foundation wrote:

    The story has been verified and is true: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html

    “When you cite someone’s reporting in the blog world, it is proper netiquette to link to their report.”

    “Citing information is what it is, a cite.”

  10. avatar
    GeorgetownJD February 3, 2009 at 11:36 pm #

    Orlybots.

  11. avatar
    Patrick McKinnion February 3, 2009 at 11:52 pm #

    Yeah. And I still think it’s funny-weird that someone who happens to BE Jewish would promote anything an avowed anti-semite like Turner wrote.

  12. avatar
    Hitandrun February 4, 2009 at 5:23 pm #

    Doc,

    Is it your non-literalistview that the “obvious intent of the Constitution” on increased emoluments renders the Saxbe fix legally unnecessary in cases like Saxbe and Clinton?

    Curious,
    Hitandrun

  13. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 4, 2009 at 5:27 pm #

    No. I think the spirit and intent of the Constitution requires something like the Saxbe fix.

    A literal reading of the Constitution would basically say that no one in Congress was eligible for the Cabinet this time around, and I don’t think that’s what was intended.

  14. avatar
    brygenon February 4, 2009 at 9:49 pm #

    “[…] what would you call someone who mindlessly follows Orly Taitz”?

    Regurgi Taitz

  15. avatar
    bogus info February 5, 2009 at 7:01 am #

    http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?page_id=1909
    State Initiatives

  16. avatar
    bogus info February 5, 2009 at 7:04 am #

    Now this is really confusing. One minute people complain because there wasn’t enough oversight in these “stimulus packages”; then when President Obama provides oversight, the complain that he is violating the Constitution? Gee, this bunch doesn’t know what they want.

    http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=975

    Obama – Limits Executive Pay – Executives Should Join Berg, Taitz, and Pidgeon to Fight This “Unlawful” Action – The BOPAC Report

  17. avatar
    Ian Gould February 5, 2009 at 7:21 am #

    They know what they want – a country where only white heterosexual Christians have any political power.

  18. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy February 5, 2009 at 8:13 am #

    The goal is smearing Obama, not the public good. They are being perfectly consistent.