Remember the Fallen, Forget the Politics

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

September 7, 2009

For my grandparents it was December 7, 1941. For my parents it was November 22, 1963 and July 20, 1969. For us it will always be September 11, 2001.

Dates that define a generation.

Whether it was the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as the impetus to the United States’ full scale involvement in World War II, the assassination of John F. Kennedy and landing a man on the moon punctuating the turbulence that was the ‘60s, or the most horrific and worst attacks perpetrated against this nation by a foreign enemy on our soil, ask Americans where they were on those pivotal dates and there will be no hesitation in an answer.

Working on a deadline, I wrote from home that day finalizing my news articles when the attacks on the World Trade Center came across the Fox News Channel playing in the background. Then the Pentagon was struck; and finally the plane crash in Pennsylvania. From that moment, everything changed. We were at war and the signs were visible. Immediately reporters from the newspaper for which I worked were dispatched throughout the various communities we covered. All other stories were back-burnered.

For me, that community was Herndon, and upon first notice, the streets around downtown were abandoned, save for a sight I had not seen there before. Members of the Herndon Police Department patrolled the streets with large firearms. The friendly-faced uniformed officers, never looked more serious in their diligence to ensure the public safety on that day and the days to follow.

We came together as a nation to mourn the loss of nearly 3,000 human beings – mostly Americans, but all living in America, some from the countries that spawned the evil that had been perpetrated upon this nation. I don’t know anyone who does not have a personal connection to September 11, 2001 – whether they lost a loved one, survived the attacks themselves or currently serves in the armed forces as a result of the attacks.

There was a call to arms that day and the nation responded without asking political parties. Just as the day after Franklin Roosevelt declared that December 7 was a “date which will live in infamy,” Congress declared war on Japan by a unanimous vote, save for one member of the House.

(That member was Jeannette Rankin (R-MT), the first woman elected to Congress, who said after her “nay” vote, that “as a woman I can’t go to war, and I refuse to send anyone else.”)

The vote to enter WWII involved no party jockeying; it was a unified decision to protect and defend the nation.

When JFK was assassinated, the nation mourned as Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans. The citizens, the regular folks, are not behaving in a political manner as we embark upon the eighth anniversary of the September 11 attacks.

September 11 has since been appropriately labeled Patriot’s Day. It is a day that should be reserved for remembering the fallen – those who lost their lives that day, and those who continue to lose their lives fighting in the global war on terror. September 11, 2009 should not be a day for rallying people to support a political agenda or demonizing a news network as the Obama administration is doing.

“Organizing for America,” an organization linked to the Obama administration via its website BarackObama.com, has called for using September 11 as a day to call senators in support of the Obama-care and also get out a message to “fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists who are subverting the American Democratic Process, whipped into a frenzy by their Fox Propaganda Network ceaselessly re-seizing power for their treacherous leaders.”

While this administration sullies the memories of the victims of the enemy attacks on American soil with its politicization of Patriot Day-irrelevant issues and denigration a media outlet whose job it is to keep the American people informed, it is also on a quest to reduce this nation’s military capabilities in a manner detrimental to our safety.

I offer this non-political notion from Ronald Reagan, who called for “peace through strength.” On this September 11, remember the fallen, forget the politics.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

Moran’s Town Hall Almost Town Brawl

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

August 26, 2009

Much akin to throwing the Christians to the Lions, and by Lions I mean the winless 2008 Detroit Lions, so anemic they haven’t the will to devour their potential prey, US Rep. Jim Moran of Virginia’s eighth Congressional District faced a mostly convivial if not staged audience Tuesday night at South Lakes High School in Reston.

People began arriving before 3 p.m. on Tuesday for an event that was slated for a 7 p.m. kickoff with doors opening at 6 p.m. According to Moran’s official website, the event would be limited to residents of the eighth district and they would be asked for identification in an effort to ensure seating for the Congressman’s constituents. That turned out to part of the smoke and mirrors that was this town hall meeting as several Moran staffers handed out slips of paper for folks to write their addresses and IDs were not checked, except for one gentleman, whose ID was examined specifically by Moran himself, later in the evening.

Then there were the Obama minions handing out a couple thousand pre-printed signs supporting his health care program sponsored by Organizing for America, an Obama political action group. They also had several tables set up near the school’s entrance to sign people up for something or another. Plus, there was a large group of Obama supporters attempting to circumvent the line by going to the locked doors, asking security to allow them entrance because they were “with the group.” When denied entrance, they simply stood at the doors in front of the folks who had stood in line for nearly three hours.

Somehow, although I was close enough to the front of the line to touch the door, upon entering the building and then the gymnasium, the first five rows were already filled with Obama/Moran/health care supporters and their signs to put on a good show for the cameras, of which there were plenty.

For those who have been accusing the people who are opposed to Obama-care of behaving like a mob and acting un-American for daring to demonstrate dissent, let the record show that the pro-Obama-care forces, who outnumbered the opposition about eight to one of the crowd of nearly 3,000, were behaving in a mob-like fashion. They shouted “yes we can,” drowning out the room in what some may have described as a pep rally atmosphere. Quite frankly, with the cacophony of angry shouts and chants the atmosphere mirrored that of a union meeting full of recently laid off auto workers – and no offense to auto workers.

This is not to say that the people opposed to Obama-care behaved like perfect angels, but theirs was more reactionary than antagonistic as some of the pro-Obama-care forces demonstrated. Quite frankly, it is because of such ill-conceived legislation that people have attended these meetings en masse to demonstrate their outrage and ask questions of their legislators and actually expect answers.

At one point a crowd gathered near the front of the room during one of the chanting battles and without any instigation or provocation, a woman in her late 50s to early 60s with a hideous red dye job poked a man with her cane. Later in the evening the same woman used profanity toward several anti-Obama-care forces. Later still, she used her professionally made sign to block the gentleman sitting behind her from using his video camera. When he moved, she moved, and so on.

Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean, also a doctor, was on hand to assist Moran with details about Obama-care. When he was introduced at about 8:05, nearly an hour into the scheduled two-hour event, that began 10 minutes late in the first place, the polarizing figure drew more boos than applause, and this was a favorable Obama-care crowd. A group sitting two rows behind me stood up and began chanting “we won’t pay for murder,” in reference to Dean’s apparent support of federally funded abortions as part of Obama-care. This went on for more than five minutes until Fairfax County police “escorted” the chanters out of the room.

During the chanting, a swarm of media converged around them with cameras and microphones, but not all the photographers were members of the media. One woman in particular, working for no media outlet, stood about a foot from me – I was seated during this near-mêlée, observing and taking notes – readying to take my picture. While I am not camera averse, I saw no reason to be photographed by some random woman. I put my hand up between my face and her camera – touching neither her or her camera. She in turn put her hand up to my face, swore at me and then gave me the one-fingered salute as she retreated.

So unpopular was Dean, that when Moran passed one constituent’s question to Dean, the constituent objected saying he did not want to hear from Dean, but from Moran, his elected representative. Dean did admit that the drug industry does better as a for profit entity. But then reverted back to form when he said he does not think insurance companies should be for profit, much to the delight of the Obama-care supporters.

Another battle that ensued also came from people sitting one row in front of me and one row behind me. Yes, in the sixth row, I had a delightful ring side seat. My new friend Tito, a Colombian native who also lived in Venezuela prior to becoming a US citizen and now owns a construction business, shouted “liar,” with each explanation offered by Moran for what he called “myths” about HR 3200, the health care bill. The folks sitting a row in front of me, supporters of Obama-care, detecting Tito’s obvious Hispanic accent, shouted at him to shut up and go home. In fact, any time opposition was expressed, Obama-care supporters simply yelled shut up and more often than not, had no facts on which to base their support of Obama-care.

The problem is that an overwhelming number of Obama-care supporters are young people living in the generation of government support from womb to tomb and cradle to grave – nothing at all like the intentions of the Founding Fathers. That a public option could even be considered when it has the potential to eradicate private insurance and become a government monopoly is unconstitutional, yet there is nary a challenge to this notion.

In addition to the professionally made signs supporting Obama-care, the most creative came from the anti-Obama-care people who brought their handmade signs with them. Some of the signs read: “Obamacare will destroy my business,” “Dissent IS American,” “Doctor’s oath: do no harm – Congress’ oath: spend, spend, spend,” “Obamanomics – trickle-up poverty,” “My health, not your power,” “Euthanize socialist health care,” and one held by a young man on crutches: “Cripples Against Obamacare.” He said being handicapped, it was his prerogative to use the word crippled.

Overall, this was a pro-Obama-care crowd and that was evident from the outset and the words offered by Rabbi Robert Nosanchuk of the Northern Virginia Hebrew Congregation. Crossing the line of church-state with his prayer calling for health care reform, saying “health care needs help,” the rabbi’s words drew jeers from some of the crowd, demonstrative of the evening that followed. And quite frankly, the rabbi wasn’t all that pleasant after the event when I approached him to verify the correct spelling of his name – something any responsible writer would do. He wanted my name, who I was with and then guided me to the congregation’s website to garner such information. Only when I asked him about someone connected to his congregation, did he acquiesce.

Early on, Moran said “dissent is as American as apple pie,” to which came the shouted response, “tell Pelosi.” Moran followed with “the voices of the American people should not be silenced,” and again the response of “tell Pelosi” could be heard loud and clear.

Yet is was Moran himself who attempted to squelch the voice of one of his own constituents during the all too brief question and answer period during the last half hour of the two-hour event. My new friend Roland Tulino sitting next to me, had his name drawn from the box to ask his question. He had also been rather vocal during the event leading up to the Q and A session. Upon arriving to the dais to take the microphone, Moran accused Tulino of being an imposter and asked him for identification. Having showing it to Moran, Tulino then asked Moran for his ID, but was rebuffed. Several minutes after asking his question Tulino received a public apology from Moran for the previous exchange, which Tulino accepted.

This is just demonstrative of elected officials who so rarely descend from their ivory towers to mix and mingle with the folks. The less than friendly banter between the pro-Obama-care and the anti-Obama-care contingents battled throughout the meeting, save for when the subject of tort reform was finally raised near the end of the evening. On this singular issue it was obvious that both forces could agree on one thing – all have a common enemy – lawyers. All in all, however, what the event lacked in civility and potential progress, it certainly made up for with grandstanding and political theater of the absurd.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer living in Alexandria, VA and an 8^th District resident.

Gov’t Reaction to Protesters – Un-American

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

August 10, 2009

Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) demonstrates how her permanent residence in her ivory tower sneering down upon the minions beneath her has affected her perspective, when she liberally accuses American citizens of having mob mentality for simply exercising their rights to free speech and expression as guaranteed by the Constitution.

Remember the Constitution? It’s that pesky little document that has stood the test of time since 1787, but has slowly been torn asunder and ignored since January 20, 2009.

Perhaps the Shrieker of the House needs a refresher course in the Constitution of the United States. Perhaps she needs to actually mingle amongst the people who send her to Washington every two years and find out what’s really on their minds. Perhaps she needs to have Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) join her on a listening tour to see that the “well dressed” protesters are not Nazis wielding swastikas, torches and pitchforks traipsing through the villages scaring the women and children.

Where were Pelosi, Boxer, et al during the George W. Bush administration when their supporters liberally paraded around following Bush from appearance to appearance carrying swastika-laden signs, pictures depicting Bush with Hitleresque mustaches and Bush side by side with Hitler? There was no condemnation, just the defense of the protesters’ freedom of speech and expression.

Well, many of the people currently protesting, in an appropriate and legal fashion, are women – businesswomen, women who are doctors, mothers, students and children who are old enough to know better than the average member of Congress that Obama-care is a farce and will bankrupt this nation. These are real people with genuine concerns.

The Organizer in Chief seems only to support the notion of citizens taking to the streets and town hall meetings to protest issues that he deems appropriate for objection. It seems to many of us who are literate that Obama-care is a form of eugenics, a life and death controlling system run by government and a litany of bureaucrats who have little to no connection to the medical field.

Obama, Pelosi and Boxer need to read some American history – they’ve got time since they are clearly not reading the legislation they advocate, write and support. They need to read the part about protesters being the epitome of Americana. They need to read the part about how the United States would not be the United States were it not for the John Adamses, Sam Adamses, Thomas Jeffersons, James Madisons, Thomas Paines and George Washingtons taking up the call for freedom and liberty – all starting with protests, pamphlets and passion. They need to remember that were it not for protests, the battle for independence would never have taken place and they would still be driving on the left side of the road speaking British-English.

There is nothing un-American about the peaceful gathering of American citizens at their Congressman’s town hall meeting and demanding answers. They work for us! We hired them in November 2008 and we can fire them in November 2010. They are answerable to the people, not the other way around. If your member of Congress is not holding a town hall meeting, call his or her office and DEMAND one – it’s your right to get answers. When people like Pelosi, Boxer, Harry Reid (D-NV) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD) say they don’t understand the so-called anger and vitriol of their constituents, and dismiss it as manufactured, it’s because they are out of touch with what is on the minds of the voters. Hoyer actually called a group of protesters “rabid” adding that “normal citizens do not behave this way.”

If their behavior was untoward it was provoked and manifested by an administration ignoring the people. Yet, in reality this was simply a group of American citizens attending a town hall meeting demanding answers from the elected representatives who have been dodging their responsibilities, and must be held accountable.

For the majority of you reading this, you live in the 8^th Congressional District of Virginia. Representative Jim Moran is holding a town hall meeting on Tuesday, August 25 from 7-9 p.m., at South Lakes High School located at 11400 South Lakes Drive, Reston. Moran will be joined by the screamer, Howard Dean, who is by trade, a doctor. As the great radio host Bob Grant says, “your influence counts – use it!”

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

“The American people are understandably queasy.” – Barack Hussein Obama, July 22, 2009

Obama-Care Makes America Sick

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

July 23, 2009

What is making the American people queasy is a Congress that does not pay attention to those who hired them in the first place. What is making the American people queasy is a Congress that does not do the job for which it was hired. What is making the American people queasy is the possibility of a healthcare program run by the Federal Government – after all, we all know how well the government has run the postal service, the department of motor vehicles and the public school system.

In a press conference that revealed nothing except Obama’s serious lack of a grasp on reality and a mostly sycophantic, fawning press, the state of capitalism, free choice and a first class medical system are on the critical list with doctors and nurses fleeing from the patient.

Actually the possibility of doctors and nurses leaving their chosen professions is approaching reality as their incomes will drop, and they will lose many of the freedoms they and their patients currently enjoy. Yet, Obama claimed his plan is supported by the American Medical Association and the American Nursing Association. However, the reality is that  only 20 to 30 percent of AMA doctors support the plan and seven other medical societies have weighed in against the plan. Medical and nursing school will still cost an arm and a leg, but the days of top salaries will be a thing of the past. Obama all but admitted as much during his press lecture when he said that “we will cut medical costs.”

How will that happen? Via a drop in salaries? Cutting the cost of medical care? Cutting the cost of drugs? Obama mentioned having the support of the traditionally left of center AARP, which would make one think they could help cut the cost of medical care and drugs. However, those companies use profits to support candidates like Obama, so no chance of cutting the cost of medical care or drugs. Drug companies should not be begrudged their profits as they are the ones who conduct the research and development of the new drugs that are needed to fight diseases as well as the irresponsible behavior of Americans who live haphazard lives and expect government to take car of them womb to tomb and cradle to grave. Consider the amount of trial and error involved in R and D, thus the profit margin. This is a capitalist society and companies are entitled to reap the rewards produced by their risks and investments and make a profit.

Medical care in and of itself will wane simply because Obama is seeking to level the playing field to ensure that we all have worse care. He claims Americans pay $6,000 more per person than any other developed country – that is disingenuous as one cannot compare the United States to other countries with dissimilar populations and economies. Do we want health care a la Cuba, Sweden or even Great Britain, for example? Americans are not fleeing this country for health care overseas; just the opposite as thousands of foreigners are literally dying to get into the United States for medical treatment.

However, remember this is not really about health care, but instead health insurance. Obama noted there are allegedly 47 million people in the United States living sans health insurance, saying, “I want to cover everybody,” all but guaranteeing a rise in the cost of premiums to cover the uninsured. And it begs the questions, how many of the 47 million are in the United States illegally and how many simply choose not to be insured. Before Obama officially becomes the clone of Fidel Castro, he needs to be reminded that not having insurance is also a choice people in this country can make.

Obama asserted that people should be able to get affordable health care. Agreed; but it should not be thrust upon the American people; after all this is still a country of individual choice and personal responsibility.  Additionally, demonstrating that this is about health insurance and not health care, Obama said he has a goal to “take [the] profit motive out” of the insurance companies adding that they are “making record-breaking profits.” That’s the American way – capitalism in action. The Obama desire to curtail that process is him tipping his own hand showing his cards leading this country down a path toward socialism.

Obama also demonstrated his “don’t do as I say, do as I do” attitude when he condemned the politics of health care, saying it should not be a political volleyball. Yet, in the very next sentence, he blamed two Republicans, not by name, for attempting to stymie his plan without mentioning the Blue Dog Democrats who may (hopefully) sink this dastardly bill – a bill he himself has yet to read. Fortunately, Obama does not get to vote on it. Unfortunately, the people for whom it is the responsibility to read such legislation prior to voting yea or nay have yet to do so either. This is their job. This is what they were sent to Washington to do and they are neglecting their sworn duties. If they are not willing to do their jobs the voters must do theirs and replace these indolent weasels.

Not only are the members of Congress not reading the legislation they are writing, but they are being implored by Obama to pass the bill into law prior to taking their August recess. This is one time I am endorsing the Congressional recess, and for two reasons – when they are idle, they can do no harm and when they return to their home districts they will get earfuls from their constituents to hopefully get them to see the light and crush this feeble legislation into dust.

After all, why the rush to passage before the recess? Oh, because of the fear of the people threatening to vote against their representatives en masse in 2010 and denying Obama a perpetual Democratic majority in Congress to do his bidding. So much for the Obama promise of transparency.

And if Obama-care is so great, why has not every member of Congress signed on for it as their own family plan? Perhaps because there is a provision on page 16 of the 1,018-page monstrosity making individual private medical insurance illegal. If Ted Kennedy needs medical attention, every effort will be made to keep him alive, while simultaneously, grandma will be subjected to being cast upon an ice float in the Arctic. Conversely, Obama bragged about the great policies he and Congress have. Why are the American people not entitled to that plan? Perhaps the stars were not as fully aligned as Obama claimed they were during his press conference.

Another ridiculous part of the plan requires all employers to cover all employees. This will only lead to increased unemployment as employers who can not afford such a stringent coverage policy will simply cut their work force. And to what extent will employees actually be covered? When did employer provided health insurance become a right and not a privilege? Instead of the government dictating the policy, there should be more competition amongst health care providers and everybody will benefit.

Contact your representatives, or the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 to find your representative, demand that they first read the “health care for all Americans” bill, then vote against it, thus preserving what is currently the best health care in the world.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

Sotomayor Compelling but not Court-Worthy

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

July 12, 2009

Let’s get the buzzwords out of the way so we can discuss what’s really important here. This is not about gender, as the Democrats blocked the Bush appointment of a qualified Janice Rogers Brown via filibuster. This is not about race – see the previous sentence about Ms. Brown who also happens to be black, not that that should matter. This is not about ethnicity, as the Democrats blocked the Bush appointment of a qualified Miguel Estrada, a native Honduran, via filibuster.

Both Brown and Estrada were nominated to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. And let the record show that Ms. Brown is the daughter of black sharecroppers who grew up in segregated Alabama, yet little was heard about her background from the so-called mainstream media. And even less has been heard about Justice Benjamin Cardozo (1870-1938), nominated by Republican President Herbert Hoover in 1932. Cardozo fits two minority molds having been both Jewish and of Spanish and Portuguese heritage.

This is not about how sympathetic one is based upon how hard one’s upbringing was. If that were the case, Clarence Thomas would not have been harangued by the hypocritical Democrats on the Judiciary Committee two decades ago. Anyone who has read or spoken about her past will admit to being impressed about how Judge Sonia Sotomayor has risen up from the Bronx projects of her youth to Cardinal Spellman to Princeton as an undergraduate and to Yale Law School. Not to take away from her accomplishments, but Sotomayor herself has admitted benefiting from a system of affirmative action. So too for Justice Thomas, but it does not rule his life or his decision-making process on the bench.

Compelling is the oft-used word to describe Sotomayor’s life story, and it is, but that does not give her automatic entrance onto the highest court in the nation. The 12 Democrats sitting on the Judiciary Committee can praise Sotomayor from here to San Juan and back, but all the platitudes in the world are merely a façade for the bigger issues that plague this nominee. Issues that the seven Republicans on the same Judiciary Committee will bring up to legitimately question the validity of this nominee’s fitness to serve an unchecked lifetime appointment.

This is about whether or not Sonia Sotomayor should serve a life term on the Supreme Court – the highest court in these United States. She should not. Using the Senator Obama method, sure Sotomayor is qualified, but that doesn’t mean she will get the votes from those who oppose her politically. Obama, when Senator of Illinois, practically said the same thing of current Chief Justice John Roberts, an eminently qualified jurist who somehow came up short in Obama’s mind.

Make no mistake, the Obama appointment of Sotomayor is both shrewd and overtly political. Shrewd as it puts the GOP senators’ collective backs to the wall already having enough problems securing Hispanic votes, and political, as it all but locks in Hispanic loyalty to Obama and the Democrats for the selection. Unfortunately, too many elected Republicans are afraid of their own shadows and will not have the intestinal fortitude to stand up and vote against this nominee who will earn confirmation with well more than the necessary votes required. There are too few Tom Coburns (OK), Lindsey Grahams (SC) and Jeff Sessions (AL) in the GOP and too many Susan Collinses (ME), Olympia Snowes (ME) and George Voinoviches (OH).

Those who question whether or not the Republican members of the Judiciary Committee should use a full court press in their questioning of a nominee who will almost surely garner confirmation do not understand the process. This is not about the votes, but instead an opportunity for the members of the Senate who must vote yea or nay on Sotomayor to understand her judicial philosophy and the direction in which she sees the Supreme Court moving during her life tenure. The questioning will not entail hammering of a nominee, but a tempered, yet detailed probing to unearth the information required to make a cogent decision. This is also an opportunity for the American people to hear from Sotomayor first hand in an effort to gage what kind of justice she might become.

The Democrats will remind us that Judge Sotomayor is a mainstream candidate for the Supreme Court, after all she was initially nominated to the bench by President George Herbert Walker Bush upon the recommendation of the late Senator Pat Moynihan (D-NY). That the first President Bush appointed her is meaningless – see also retiring Justice David Souter, a disastrous appointment whose departure can’t come soon enough.

The bottom line of Sotomayor’s nomination ought to be about her words, her beliefs, her biases and her record. Having sat on the bench now for 17 years, Sotomayor has enough of a record that neither she nor her supporters can claim her words are being taken out of context. Sotomayor has tremendous experience, which clearly can be viewed as a double-edged sword.

Perhaps most damning are the 32 words she has uttered on more than one occasion. “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion [as a judge] that a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” The word “better” is most troubling as Sotomayor is deigning to say outright that her background makes her decision-making process superior to any white male.

Juan Williams, author and commentator on National Public Radio as well as on Fox News, is certainly no conservative. He called Sotomayor’s statement racial on July 12. Rush Limbaugh said the same thing, but was excoriated for the comment simply because he is a conservative lightening rod. Sotomayor has since said she wished she had said those words in a better way. She meant what she said and has no regrets about it; and that’s fine – it gives us greater insight into how she will behave on the bench.

Our system of jurisprudence in the United States is supposed to be colorblind. Now, I am realistic enough to comprehend that clearly it has not been, is not now, and probably will never be in the future, but we do tend to inch ever so closer to that desire. Judge Sotomayor would set that notion back in its paces considerably. Perhaps the notion of a fair and balanced judicial system is anachronistic to both Obama and Sotomayor in this era of touchy-feely and empathy first in the courtroom, but that is not what the Founding Fathers laid out more than 200 years ago in a system that has admittedly been imperfect, but is still the best on record.

Most people don’t care if the nine jurists on the High Court’s bench are Latina, Latino, black, white or Asian, so long as they are not just qualified, but understand their purpose. The purpose is for the justices to interpret, not rewrite, the laws of the land. To interpret the Constitution and not write policy. Already, Sotomayor has that strike against her as she has said on more than occasion, that the Court of Appeals, where she has served, is where policy is made. That is a dangerous idea. The making of policy and creating legislation is, according to the Constitution, the purpose of the United States Congress – even as incompetent as it is.

Sotomayor has also suggested that gun ownership is not a fundamental right and that the states are not held to the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Last I checked, it is the 10^th Amendment to the Constitution that tells us that that which is not defined by the previous nine amendments is left to the states. The second amendment does provide for “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” She has also come down on the side against people’s personal property rights on a number  of cases.

Then there’s the Ricci case, whose decision was just handed down by the Supreme Court less than three weeks ago. Twenty men, 19 white and one Hispanic sued the New Haven, CT Fire Department over a promotions exam that they passed but was thrown out denying the firefighters their just promotions simply because no black firefighters who took the same test earned a score qualifying them for the same promotion. The US Court of Appeals for the 2^nd Circuit, on which Sotomayor sits, upheld the lower court decision to deny the passing firefighters their promotions.

The Supreme Court overturned the ruling made by Sotomayor’s panel in a 5-4 decision on June 29. Sotomayor opined that in essence it is permissible to discriminate against one group in favor of another group. That the firefighters who passed the same test all others took should not be given the promotions they earned fairly is unconscionable. That the white and Hispanic firefighters should be penalized because the black firefighters were among those who did not pass the exam is absolutely discriminatory and it is a discrimination supported by Judge Sotomayor. And this was not the first time Sotomayor has been overturned by the Supremes – in fact four times out of six her decisions have been upended by the High Court.

Judge Sotomayor’s actions, judgments, rulings and writings are demonstrative of what is called judicial activism – the creation of rights not explicitly stated in the Constitution. This is not what being a Supreme Court justice is about, and although Sotomayor will almost surely be donning a High Court robe the first Monday in October, she must be watched carefully. The Senate must do its job – that’s what the system of checks and balances is about.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

Moran Out Of Touch On Many Levels

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

May 26, 2009

Congressman Jim Moran is out of touch – with both his constituents, and quite frankly, as well as with reality. Several weeks ago, Moran opined in another publication that the United States should not only close the Guantanamo Bay detention center, but that the detainees would be accepted by the good people of Alexandria – a major city within his Congressional District.

“By and large, Alexandrians are civic-minded people and are ready to do their duty if it serves the greater good,” wrote Moran.

It is not our duty to take prisoners of war, at best, and blood-thirsty terrorists hell-bent on destroying the United States and Western Civilization as we know it, at worst, out of a secure detention center for the purposes of giving them trials for which they are not entitled, on American soil where potential danger is an unnecessary possibility. When did it become the duty of non-uniformed citizens to be purposely put into harms way, Mr. Moran? This is not the kind of sacrifice civilians make during wartime. Cutting back on energy, raw materials, buying war bonds – these are the sacrifices civilians make in support of a war effort as our history has demonstrated.

Alexandrians “have shown this public spirit time and again. The ‘20^th hijacker,’ Zacarias Moussaoui, who participated in planning the Sept. 11, 2001, attack on the Pentagon, was held and prosecuted in the Alexandria courthouse,” wrote Moran.

As a former resident of the Carlyle Towers condominiums located directly across the street from the Albert V. Bryan U.S. Courthouse and Detention Center in Alexandria, I can attest to the media circus that gathered day after day, not to mention the inconvenience of the simple exiting and entering our homes on a daily basis while the hearings and trials occurred. I can also attest to the fact that the overwhelming majority of residents opposed those activities, many of whom spoke their minds at a town hall-type meeting hosted by Moran in an effort to assuage people’s concerns.

Several years later, and with the advent of the Patent-Trademark Office and its population, such trials will be a bigger nightmare than Moran can imagine. And he demonstrated his lack of imagination when he wrote “taking the easy route and joining the chorus of those crying ‘not in my back yard’ is appealing. But that’s not the Alexandria I know and have represented in Congress for nearly 20 years.” This, clearly, is not 1989.

Perhaps that’s because you, Mr. Moran, are out of touch with your constituents and no longer know what is on their minds. You win reelection every two years like clockwork without breaking a sweat and often times taking voters for granted. In an unscientific survey of liberals, conservatives and neutrals alike, 84 percent of the people I communicated with are opposed to the shut down of Gitmo in the first place. Then, to top it off, 93 percent of the folks I communicated with oppose holding trials for terrorists in American courts such as here in Alexandria. Granted this is admittedly a non-scientific poll, but the honest, patriotic, generous people of Alexandria running the spectrum from right to left are speaking out, and you, sir are not listening.

Mr. Moran noted JFK’s call to accept challenges for a higher purpose, but this is not such a purpose, nor did he envision al Qaeda or the Taliban. The Soviet Union was tame by comparison.

When people have a mission to take innocent life, they cease to be part of the community of man and surrender the right to be treated as men. The home countries of these miscreants don’t want them back. That Obama wants Gitmo closed my mid-January 2010 is purely an arbitrary decision and deadline, which as more and more members of his own party have come to realize, makes less and less sense as there is no legitimate place to put these terrorists.

Guantanamo has been working out nicely, and to a person, those who have inspected it have commented that it appears in better condition that mainland prisons. The prisoner’s religious observances are being adhered to along with their dietary needs and they even have more exercise and prayer time with their fellow prisoners than if they were in a supermax prison in the US. Gitmo is a far cry from Auschwitz.

Mr. Moran uses as a reason to close Gitmo that both Obama and GOP presidential candidate Senator John McCain (AZ) pledged to shut it down. Fine, so they were both wrong. Using McCain as part of the defense is disingenuous at best, especially since he did not really represent the heart of the Republican Party during the 2008 election.

Further, the Congressman makes the mistake of writing that the enemy combatants are entitled to habeas corpus. Enemy combatants are not entitled to habeas corpus. As for the rules regarding the Geneva Convention, enemy combatants may be held until the cessation of hostilities.

Representative Moran referred to Guantanamo as a “stain” on the reputation of the United States and “on our national character,” when in fact, it is his and this administration’s appeasement to Islamo-terrorism that is the stain on this nation. Closing Gitmo will not endear the United States to the fanatics whose goal is to kill us. Appeasement failed miserably for Chamberlain and it certainly won’t work today.

Priority one is the safety of American citizens, not worrying about what other countries think of us. If our reputation is so tarnished, why then are millions of people trying to enter this country, not flee – and by any means necessary (another topic for another day). This is still the greatest and freest country on G-d’s earth.

We are at war against a flagless, borderless, nationless enemy – a war, by the way, Mr. Moran publicly blamed on the Jews just a few years ago. September 11, 2001 is not just a passing historical fact – the Pentagon is in Mr. Moran’s district, as is Arlington National Cemetery – the memories of those who rest there are being sullied by Congressman Moran’s callousness.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

“Two out of three ain’t bad.” – singer, songwriter, philosopher, Meat Loaf

Change We Can Finally Count On

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

May 6, 2009

We did it! Frank Fannon and Alicia Hughes have the title of Alexandria City Councilmen-elect! I just love the smell of victory in the morning!

I want to “personally” e-thank every one of you who took the time to vote yesterday in the Alexandria City Council race and sent a message that one-party rule just isn’t right in the land of a democratic-republic.

Whether you responded to my column or the Alexandria Republican City Committee messages of “plunking,” for our three endorsed candidates, you took to the polls to buck the trend of single-party domination in Alexandria.

Thank you, not just for your vote, but for your time – be it an hour, a day, a week or a month of helping this team-oriented campaign succeed. Whether you walked your neighborhood or several neighborhoods; made phone calls or sent e-mails by the dozens, wrote a check, wrote a letter or simply cast your all-important ballot, this grassroots effort allowed us to garner two seats on the City Council.

This is just the beginning. As Lincoln became the first Republican president in winning the election of 1860, GOP candidate John C. Fremont helped lay the groundwork with his 1856 candidacy. Likewise in Alexandria, we shocked the community when Joe Murray was narrowly defeated by a mere 16 votes in a January special election for a House of Delegates seat. This, in an 80-20 Democratic majority district, jump-started the current GOP effort.

While we congratulate our new councilmen-elect Frank Fannon and Alicia Hughes, we also thank Phil Cefaratti. Each of the three GOP-endorsed candidates worked tirelessly getting out their messages to the public, appearing at countless homeowners association meetings, Metro stations, strip mall parking lots, neighborhood after neighborhood and candidate forums. All three can hold their heads high for running honorable campaigns with dignity and integrity.

But the work isn’t over just yet. We are on a roll. With House of Delegates seats at stake along with statewide races for governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general, we are looking ahead to November and a Congressional race in 2010.

All things are possible – with your continued help and support. Let’s keep the ball rolling and continue to take back out government.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

Two Strikes Enough for DC Gov’t

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

May 4, 2009

Like petulant three-year-olds arguing over their favorite toy, DC Mayor Adrian Fenty and the City Council should be ejected from their cushy-tushy box at Nationals Park and made to sit with the constituents they claim to represent. In this case, two strikes should be enough for the out.

For the second year in a row, 86 season tickets are the bones of contention. Several members of the City Council assert that Fenty is ostensibly holding the council’s tickets hostage – tickets that neither the mayor nor the council paid for. These are tickets to stadium suites and parking passes valued in the hundreds of thousands of dollars; at 81 home games, that’s a total of 6,966 tickets. The notion of a government body accepting such gifts smacks of nothing short of graft. If the mayor or members of the council want to take in a Nationals game, and they are encouraged to do so, they can pay for their tickets like the rest of the grit-eating community.

Councilman Kwame Brown had the smart idea of auctioning off the tickets – 67 of which are allotted to the mayor and the remaining 19 to the council. Let’s face it, most of those seats remain empty throughout the season. Quite frankly, most seats around Nationals Park are empty with the product that’s being put on the field. Perhaps instead of auctioning the tickets, they should be given to honor role students for setting a good academic example. Perhaps they could be used for Make-a-Wish style give-aways. People are not clamoring for seats to Nationals games. John Lennon and George Harrison could rise from the dead and the Beatles couldn’t fill that stadium. The only prayer of filling Nationals Park was when Pope Benedict XVI paid a visit last year.

Make no mistake, it’s great that the nation’s capital finally has a team after 31 years of dormancy, but this was not an expansion team, but instead the move of an existing team – the team formerly known as the Montreal Expos. And as nice a stadium as Nationals Park is, public/government funding of stadiums is a big no-no. Teams should be footing the bill for their own ballpark; after all, who reaps the rewards? The team owners. If taxpayer dollars are utilized, then the taxpayers ought to be shareholders entitled to dividends, or in this case, tickets.

For as nice as the ballpark experience is, and it is, it’s just too much of a hassle to wait for Metro before and after the game in crowded stations, or afford the parking lot fees, plus the cost of food not to mention the outrageous notion of charging $29.95 for a book of 100 blank scorecards, as advertised while watching a Nationals game on television one night last week. One announcer shamelessly endorsed the blank-paged book by saying there are helpful hints on how to keep a proper scorecard. Folks – here’s a nickel’s worth of free advise: go online, print out a scorecard, bring it with you to the stadium. If you want some helpful hints as to how to fill it out, I’ll post them to my website for free. There you go; 30 bucks saved; buy your friend Sanford a kosher dog next time you see him at the ballpark.

Another Nationals-related travesty is the recent decision that the city will pay the costs to keep Metro running overtime when the Nationals play into the wee hours. This should have been a no-brainer. That should be an E-DC. The Nationals organization should without a doubt be coughing up the dough here. Could the city be kissing the team’s tuchus any more?

Ultimately, when Metro raises it rates to cover the overtime to the tune of $27,000 an hour, all Metro riders will pay the price. Two hours of overtime could pay an experienced teacher’s salary for a year. Apparently the city has been paying the freight on overtime since the return of baseball to DC in 2005 as the Nationals have refused to pay for the service. Nationals fans already pay enough to attend a game as it is. The team is the one entity raking in the bucks during rain delays, extra-inning affairs and double-headers, not that a real double-header exists any more.

The District ought to reverse its call, demand the team fork over the dinero for the overtime or see its fans stranded. Angry fans do not revisit ballparks when the team is the cause of their ire. The team cannot afford to alienate any more fans as it is. It’s high time the Washington Nationals remember their first name is Washington and become a homer.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA. He is a lifelong New York Mets fan.

Obama, et al, Need Sensitivity Training

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

April 28, 2009

In plain English, what the hell is the matter with this pinhead masquerading as a leader? An unannounced fly-over Ground Zero in Manhattan for the purpose of a photo op near the Statue of Liberty by a plane serving as a backup to Air Force One not to mention the accompaniment of the fighter jet escorts. As Chandler Bing on Friends would say, could that BE more insensitive?

Thousands of people working Monday, April 27, in New York City, on a calm, clear spring day, when unnecessary panic ensued thanks to an overzealous administration simply trying to provide a media photo. Apparently the flight was approved by the Federal Aviation Administration, but the FAA ordered an information blackout. The needless scare sent multitudes running for cover in what could have turned into an injury-laden panic.

Hey, while you’re at it Mr. Obama, why not send some brown-shirted goose-steppers into the local synagogue and a few guys in white hoods traipsing through a Selma church.

Therapists all around the New York metropolitan area are working overtime to begin with, now this idiotic decision, which White House spokesman Robert Gibbs claimed no knowledge. This is actually believable considering the man couldn’t find his own tuchus with both hands.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani called this “a terrible mistake,” rightfully chiding the Obama administration. “If it had to be done, all kinds of public announcements should have been made. Why are we spending money on this?” After all the self-righteous talk criticizing the use of private planes, added “America’s Mayor.”

The price tag for this moronic stunt has been estimated to be $325, 835, said Tom Schatz with Citizens Against Government Waste. And even I, your humble scribe and avowed technotard, have heard of Adobe Photo Shop.

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called this event “appalling… knowing full well that New Yorkers would still have the memory of 9/11 sketched in their minds.”

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) said he was “furious” that he had not been given an advance heads up and that if he had, he would have fought such an insensitive act.

There is no doubt a public announcement should have been made days in advance via multi-media sources to quell a potential panic, but this is typical of the thoughtlessness coming out of the Obama administration.

Meanwhile, while the apologist in chief is gallivanting around the world criticizing his own country and making nice with despotic dictators, back at home he has a Secretary of Homeland Security who should no longer hold her post.

Janet Napolitano, the former Arizona governor, had the audacity to call honored military veterans right wing extremists and potential domestic terrorists on the heels of a successful peaceful tax day protest. A government document, for which Napolitano offered a disingenuous apology, all but accused veterans of greater criminal activity than non-veterans and that conservative activists in general are the cause of national security problems. Additionally, this alleged intelligence assessment targeted conservatives in general, but more specifically any American opposing Obama’s social engineering, as well as those who oppose abortion, same sex marriage, and supporters of the Second Amendment. Additionally, Napolitano has called on local and state law enforcement to investigate such “miscreants.”

Napolitano has also said that strict border monitoring is not yet necessary. So it really should not be a surprise that she said “crossing the border illegally is not a crime.” Napolitano is referred to Section B, Title 1325 of the U.S. Code that states otherwise. As the former governor of a border state with Mexico, she of all people should be painfully aware of the trials and tribulations Arizonans, Californians, New Mexicans and Texans have endured. The Phoenix-metropolitan area is now the ranked as the worst and most likely place to be kidnapped in the United States, and Napolitano isn’t rankled by this horrifying piece of information?

Meanwhile, as Napolitano is ineffective as Homeland Security chief, she is now trying her hand as Secretary of Health and Human Services speaking out about the swine flu situation. Perhaps she can insult that away. She should not be holding either of those jobs.

Yet, sadly, the new HHS secretary is no more fit for that position than Napolitano. Former Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, is a strong supporter of abortion rights to the point of siding with, and receiving, campaign contributions to the tune of thousands of dollars from late-term abortionist George Tiller, a.k.a. Tiller the Baby Killer. Her appointment will put a radical stamp on HHS.

Sebelius won Senate approval on Tuesday by a 65-31 margin with three senators not voting. Shame on the eight Republican senators who voted for Sebelius. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both Maine RINOs did not surprise anyone with their support of Sebelius. Neither did George Voinovich (OH), Judd Gregg (NH) or Richard Lugar (IN). However, yea votes from Kit Bond (MO) and both Kansas senators Sam Brownback and Pat Roberts were surprising and disappointing, especially from ardent pro-lifer Brownback who hopes to succeed Sebelius in Topeka. Had the eight Republicans stood together as the Democrats did, Sebelius could, and should, have been sent packing.

With continued administration insults and insensitivities toward more and more Americans, the GOP had better be in the trenches laying the groundwork for a strong offensive in 2010.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

RINO Specter Officially a Jackass

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

April 28, 2009

This just in: former RINO Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania has made it official just moments ago that he is leaving the GOP and returning to his Philadelphia Democratic Party roots, in what is no doubt a desperate attempt to hang on the Senate seat to he currently clings.

Specter announced he will run in the 2010 Democratic primary. Quite frankly, if Specter had any integrity, he would do as Phil Gramm did years ago when the then Democratic Congressman, first elected in 1978 and won two subsequent reelection bids, resigned in January 1983 to run in a special election a month later as a Republican. Gramm also served in the Senate from 1985 to 2003.

Specter has served in the United States Senate since 1981 as an unreliable Republican whom I have criticized in the past for his disastrous votes on issues such as the budget, bailouts and the support of numerous political appointees for whom support should not have been given. He, along with both Maine RINO Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe secured passage of much of the pork-laden projects and bailouts shoved down the throats of the American people since the beginning of this administration.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has welcomed Specter, whom he has been courting for half a decade, with open arms, and probably a big wet, sloppy kiss to boot.

Specter’s coffers are brimming with contributions supporting the senior senator’s reelection campaign. Everyone not approving of Specter’s jumping ship, politically, certainly not philosophically, should demand their contribution be returned at once. This is, as they say in TV land, Specter jumping the shark in a last desperate attempt to retain his seat. He is the ultimate opportunist’s opportunist.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

Up is Down, Chavez In, Traditional Marriage Out?

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

April 22, 2009

Based upon recent assertions calling support of traditional male-female marriage controversial, one can clearly expect a blizzard on Independence Day and heat wave on Chanukah and Christmas in the northern hemisphere. That’s because the collective sanity has sprung a leak.

The current trend in the United States these days is the flip side of “normalcy,” to borrow a term coined by President Warren G. Harding in 1920. Normal has now become Obama talking to Venezuela’s despotic dictator Hugo Chavez while accepting a heretofore unknown book that has since shot up to near the top of the charts. The flip side is the disrespect Obama showed Great Britain’s Prime Minister Gordon Brown with both thoughtless (and seemingly useless) gifts.

Normal has become the Obama bow before Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah – a bow that the White House denied in spite of video evidence to the contrary. Message to Obama: we don’t bow and we don’t dip our flag. The flip side is the continuing disrespect shown Brown and Britain by Obama when he returned the bust of Winston Churchill given to President George W. Bush by former Prime Minister Tony Blair following the 9/11 attacks. Obama also demonstrated his disrespect of our staunchest allies by canceling the traditional joint press conference and then referring to Britain as one of our allies, just lumping them in with others, instead of holding them in the esteem in which they have been held for years.

All of these political affronts aside, and they are not being dismissed lightly, now, support of traditional marriage is being called controversial. For those who seem to have forgotten, traditional marriage, and it still is for the time being, is the legal union of one man and one woman in the eyes of G-d and the state. Well, OK 46 states, as of April 27 when Iowa joins Connecticut, Massachusetts and Vermont as states allowing homosexual marriage.

And don’t get me started on Vermont – the Green Mountain State, which should be called the Pervert State. Not only has Vermont not passed a form of Jessica’s Law regarding mandatory sentencing for child sex-offenders, but the liberal state is considering legalizing “sexting” for 13 to 18-year-olds. Sexting is this new trend of teens text messaging sexual, salacious or compromising photos to one another. This will set a bad precedent and send a message to teens that their actions will have little consequence, which is wrong as such photos will haunt them for years to come.

Back to my regularly scheduled rant about how supporting traditional marriage is now deemed controversial. Carrie Prejean, 21, from San Diego and a student at San Diego Christian College has become the most famous losing contestant in the Miss USA Pageant for having the temerity to actually stand up for what she believes in and give an honest answer to the question posed her about gay marriage.

Prejean, Miss California, representing the state that overwhelmingly supported Proposition 8 last November, denying the legalization of gay marriage in the Golden State, said in her country marriage is between one man and one woman. For that answer she was castigated by a most crass, intolerable and openly gay pageant judge Perez Hilton. Hilton is certainly entitled to his opinion about gay marriage, Prejean and anything else upon which he chooses to opine, but so to is Prejean. Pageant organizer and co-owner Donald Trump praised Prejean for her answer. “I respected her answer because she gave her opinion,” said Trump.

There’s a lot to be said for the old joke, if G-d had endorsed gay marriage, he would created Adam and Steve, not Adam and Eve. There is nothing controversial about supporting the union of one man and one woman. There is nothing controversial about supporting traditional family values. What will be demanded next after gay marriage? Multiple spouses? Marriage between species? Marriage of children to adults? Where will the line be drawn?

The real controversy should be how a small community such as the gay community, not all of whom are in lock step with Hilton, should be able to dictate the morals of American society to the point where endorsement of heterosexual marriage is considered controversial.

Adding insult to injury, Hilton said Prejean should have given a politically correct answer instead of a truthful answer. What kind of message does that send? Do we really want 50 women lined up one after the other all parroting the same answer of “world peace?” No. It’s refreshing to see pageants with contestants who give thoughtful, truthful answers, even at the cost of the title. Prejean was true to herself and her convictions and she will go much further for it. That’s the lesson to be learned.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

Toliver Disrespected as Afterthought

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

April 10, 2009

Following an appropriately positive article about Maryland Terrapin basketball star Marissa Coleman’s selection by the Washington Mystics as the number two overall pick in the WNBA’s draft on Thursday, April 9 came a most inappropriate afterthought of a single sentence about the very next pick in the draft – Terp standout Kristi Toliver.

While the Washington Post included a nice draft-day photo of the Terp teammates, it completely disrespected Toliver by relegating her number three overall pick by the Chicago Sky to the aforementioned one sentence in the “WNBA Notes” as if insignificant. Is that how the Post reports fairly about one of greatest players in Terps women’s basketball history?

In case the Post needs a refresher in Toliver 101, as a freshman in 2006, she canned a three-pointer sending the championship game into overtime – a game in the Terps would eventually defeat archrival Duke. Toliver holds the team record for free throw percentage and three-pointers made, also ranking third in the ACC in the latter category as well as second in the conference for assists.

In addition to being named an All-American in 2008, Toliver became the first Terp to win the Nancy Lieberman Award for the nation’s best point guard that same year, only to follow that up by being named ACC Player of the Year this year. Toliver led the Terps this season playing 35.1 minutes per game, in scoring 18.4 points per game and with an .857 free throw percentage. She should not be dismissed or disrespected simply because the local Mystics did not draft her.

Both Toliver and Coleman had superb careers at Maryland that won’t soon be forgotten – on the court for their play and off the court as both will graduate next month.

Sanford D. Horn, Maryland, Class of 1988, is a member of both the university’s Alumni Association and the Terrapin Club.

"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." -- James Madison, Federalist No. 51

Founding Fathers Spinning in Their Graves

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

April 2, 2009

Those gurgling, choking and gasping sounds followed by a loud thud you hear are James Madison, Patrick Henry, George Mason and John Adams collectively coming back to life then dropping dead all over again as they no longer recognize the out of control government that once knew its place in American society.

Where is it written in the Constitution that the government has the right to use my tax dollars and yours to prop up businesses that should either declare bankruptcy and go through reorganization or simply dissolve and fade into that good night?

None of the bailouts authorized by both the current and previous administrations should have been approved by Congress. Not for the auto industry, the banks or the insurance industry. Sweden announced last week that is would not rescue auto mainstay Saab, yet the United States is dumping good money into troubled auto manufacturers.  Sweden, Socialist for years, but now being led by a more conservative government, had its Minister of Enterprise quip “this is not a game of Monopoly.” This government should take a lesson from that simple philosophy and tell the troubled businesses not to pass “Go” or collect $200 billion.

Failure leads to success. Without a safety net, how many inventors struck out before striking gold? Think of the numerous failures by Thomas Edison and his creative brethren. Without failure, people do not have the drive to try again and succeed. If people are not buying cars made by Chrysler, Ford and General Motors, then it is time to go back to the drawing board instead of demanding the government artificially prop them up.

Where is it written in the Constitution that the government has the right to fire a corporate CEO and require one American company to merge with another company – and a foreign one to boot?

Going under the premise that the bailouts are wrong in the first place, the government is wrong to force former GM CEO Rick Wagoner to resign. That is what stockholders and a board of directors are for. That’s free enterprise. The government is just as wrong for  forcing a merger of Chrysler with Fiat – an Italian auto maker. (I have nothing against Fiat – my father drove one in the ‘70s.)

Where is it written in the Constitution that the government has the right to thrust my tax dollars and yours on states that just say no?

When South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford (R) shunned the government stimulus money; that should have been the end of the discussion. But instead, the Federal Government seemed to have forgotten about a little thing called the 10^th Amendment.

Here’s one that really grills my onions. How did the government get so arrogant that it can shun its job of actually reading the legislation it is entrusted with reading, understanding and upon which it must then vote? Compounding their own irresponsibility, Congress then gets even more stupid by forgetting the Constitution once again by attempting to tax their way out of the original mistake.

First Congress, the Democrats, grants a monster bailout of AIG to the tune of roughly $170 billion. Then, after not reading the bill they voted to approve, Congress discovers they granted bonuses to AIG to the tune of about $160 million. Sheepishly, Congress attempted to right their own wrongs by declaring a 90 percent tax on the AIG bonuses. Once again, members of Congress, mostly attorneys, seemed to have forgotten their contract law classes. Legislation passed is a contract and the bonuses, however unsavory, need to be honored. Conduct your due diligence, Congress. Read first, then vote – avoid the embarrassment and the faux indignation that follows.

The Obama administration’s interference with and in the corporate world is its attempt to derail capitalism and the freedom of business to succeed and, yes, fail, on its own. News blast, you arrogant, sycophantic Congress: just because Obama wants to charge down the slippery slope from capitalism to socialism like a bull in a china shop does not mean you need to let go of the reins. When it comes to things economic in nature, and we learned this in grade school civics, money bills begin in the House – of Representatives, that is, and not the White House.

There is plenty of blame to go around. President George W. Bush certainly got this ball rolling toward hell with the first round of stimulus last September, all but helping to seal Sen. John McCain’s fate in November. But that does not mean that Congress must placate Obama and his grand quest to redistribute wealth by sinking this once solvent nation into a debt from which my grandchildren’s grandchildren will be digging out like a Montana blizzard.

Couple the arrogance and stupidity with lies and misplaced disingenuous anger. Should Congress want to lay blame somewhere, all they need do is look inward. Sadly, we the people must also take credit for some of the blame as well, for it was we the people who put these irresponsible pinheads back in office. We have the government we deserve. This falls into the category of we get what we pay for. Incumbents, with their name recognition and fat-cat lobbyist contributors take the average voter for granted knowing that theirs is the name the voters will remember on Election Day. Greater than 95 percent of incumbents get reelected, most of whom do so without so much as breaking a sweat.

Let us be forewarned by the words of yet another Founding Father: “Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness,” wrote George Washington in 1753.

Clearly the words of Washington were to warn the people not to let down their guard for it is the assault from within our borders we must be mindful of – or to quote the King of Crass and the one-fingered salute, Rahm Emanuel, “you never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” This is not to praise the partisan’s partisan, but to serve as a warning that this is the kind of down in the mud street fight one gets with this administration. Kick the nation while it’s down. While the nation is watching its collective 401k turn into a 201k and struggling to put food on the table, more and more of our rights are being eroded and more and more of the former capitalistic society in which we once freely lived is decaying from the inside.

The government does not owe anyone a living or a job. The government does not owe anyone a home or an automobile. The government does not owe anyone an education or health care either. What the government owes its citizenry is the opportunity to earn those desires; and that opportunity comes in the form of protecting our borders with as strong a military as possible and using as few of our tax dollars as possible for the construction and maintenance of our roads, bridges, tunnels as well as the internal protection of the citizens from the criminal element along with taking care of those citizens who are mentally and physically incapable of caring for themselves. That’s it.

The people know better how to spend their money then the government. More and more liberties are taken by elected officials of all stripes, which in turn diminish the liberties granted the citizenry by the Constitution.

“I want the people of America to be able to work less for the government and more for themselves. I want them to have the rewards of their own industry. That is the chief meaning of freedom,” said President Calvin Coolidge in his March 4, 1925 inaugural address. He may have been nicknamed “Silent Cal,” but his few words certainly packed a wallop.

The overwhelming majority of Congress needs a refresher course in the Constitution. Considering that most of them are attorneys by trade, they seem to have forgotten most of what they supposedly learned in Con-Law, and it’s not that long a document. People like Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) should be removed from Congress for their repeated lies. There are, no doubt, many others who should follow them out the doors of the hallowed halls as well.

The body politic continues to behave in an arrogant, irresponsible manner with no regard for the citizenry or anything else for that matter, save for their own reelection. It’s high time the voters wake up, and take notice that their own member may be part of the problem. It continues to astound when surveyed, the majority of folks say they like their individual member, but have no use for the institution as a whole. I am just the opposite. The institution as a whole can be salvaged if we dump the individual members – in my case, let’s start with my representative – Jim Moran (D-VA-8) who has voted in lock step in favor of every bad bill to come down the pike.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

Omnibus Bill Proving Ominous

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

March 5, 2009

With Congress prepared to throw another 410 billion of our taxpayer dollars out the window on superfluous projects many of which had previously been rejected at the state level, a few Democrats are finally waking up to smell the Arabica beans.

Moderate Senator Evan Bayh (IN) and reliable liberal senators Russ Feingold (WI) and Robert Menendez (NJ) announced they would not vote for this pork-laden omnibus bill. This after Senator John McCain (R-AZ) took to the Senate floor to decry the multitude of nonsense plaguing the bill that will continue to drive the stock market further and further into oblivion. This is where McCain demonstrates he still has an ounce of conservatism left in him, as he and conservatives lay blame where it belongs – on all members of both parties who took part in this spending orgy – and, yes, that includes the 40 percent of the pork brought to us by GOP members.

McCain cited the following examples as some of the nuggets found in the omnibus bill: $1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa, $6.6 million for termite research in New Orleans, $2.1 million for the Center for Great Genetics in New York, $1.7 million for a honeybee factory in Weslaco, TX, $333,333 for a school sidewalk in Franklin, TX, $143,000 for an on-line encyclopedia in NV, $951,000 for a sustainable Las Vegas – whatever the hell that means, and $207,000 for a tattoo removal program in Los Angeles – wasn’t Fantasy Island cancelled years ago? And on it goes to the tune of roughly 9,000 earmarks.

Bayh said this is business as usual and that the increases are counter-productive. Not just counter-productive, but in many cases previously rejected on the state level. Case in point, Nevada voters rejected a transportation system from Las Vegas to Los Angeles, which is now part of this omnibus bill to be paid for by all Americans, not just Nevadans, thanks to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. To contact Reid in Washington, DC, call 202-224-3542, or send an e-mail via his Senate website: www.reid.senate.gov.

Yes, there is a link between Capitol Hill and Wall Street, just as there is a link between Wall Street and Main Street, despite Barack Obama admitting just days ago that he doesn’t pay much attention to Wall Street. That is painfully obvious, as every time he opens his mouth the market takes another tumble toward hell. Clearly, this is demonstrative of a lack of confidence in Obama and his plans.

What happens on the Hill does not stay on the Hill. Look at the trends – when Obama makes a public pronouncement of some sort regarding the economy, the housing market, his continued attempts at wealth redistribution and tax increases, the stock market falls precipitously. Eventually people will stop investing causing companies to lose revenue, forcing them to lay more employees off, raising unemployment and thus the people’s dependence upon government.

Obama attempts to delineate a difference between Wall and Main streets, yet they are inexorably linked. In one way shape or form, virtually all Americans – Main Street, are linked to the stock market – Wall Street. Whether it is via an IRA, a 401(k) or some other investment instrument, the average American is touched by the stock market. When the market struggles, consumer confidence wanes, causing a drop in purchasing, and thus the inevitable layoffs.

Obama lied when he said anyone earning less than $250,000 would not see their taxes raised. By allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, he is doing just that – causing a raise in taxes on anyone owning stock as capital gains taxes will increase. Pushing for a reduction in allowable home mortgage interest deductions will raise the taxes of anyone owning a home. By seeking to disallow charitable contributions as a legitimate deduction, people’s taxes will not only rise, but charitable contributions will fall as a result. This in turn diminishes the ability of charities to help those in the direst of need, thus forcing them to seek increased government assistance, ultimately costing the taxpayers more money.

If not raising taxes on 95 percent of Americans is an Obama goal that he believes will help jumpstart the economy, taxes should not be raised on 100 percent of Americans for the same reason. To do otherwise defies logic, but then, so too does the notion of government making things better for the American people by running them. Instead, government takes hold of something and runs it into the ground. All one needs to do is examine the DMV, US Postal Service and the dilapidated state of public education in this country. But public education is a topic for another column.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.

DC – First in War, First in Peace, Never in Congress

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

February 23, 2009

“If the District of Columbia deserves a member of the House of Representatives, they deserve two senators as well,” said Senator John McCain (R-AZ) earlier in February.

I wholeheartedly agree with the former GOP presidential nominee. Now before those of you who know my staunch opposition to DC being awarded a voting member of Congress go into shock, notice the premise to the entire statement: IF – the biggest two-letter word in the English language. Yes, IF DC deserves, but DC does not deserve a voting member in Congress or two senators. Besides, every time Washington gets senators they up and leave for places like Minnesota and Texas!

And let’s not overlook a little thing called the Constitution of the United States of America.

Article I, Section 2: “The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States…”

Article I, Section 3: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state…”

Article I, Sections 2 and 3 clearly outlines that only states are to be represented by members of the two houses of Congress and DC is most certainly not a state. At one time, DC consisted of land from both Maryland and Virginia; today just former Maryland land comprises the seat of the nation’s government. Perhaps that land should revert back to the Free State and the residents of DC should be citizens of Maryland. Then, upon the counting of the census in 2010, Maryland would more than likely receive an additional member of Congress and the state losing the most population would drop one of its members. It has been done that way for years.

In a Washington Post column penned by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, he opined that the residents of DC “are the successors to the People of the several states – people of my home state, Maryland, who were stripped of their voting rights.” All the more reason to return them to Maryland, not, as Hoyer supports, give them a Congressional member.

Article I, Section 2: “Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union…”

If DC residents do not get a member of Congress, they should not be required to pay federal taxes or be subject to a military draft should one be necessary in the future. This would be fair, and to some extent has legs, as Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) is willing to exempt Washingtonians from “federal income tax[es] until a constitutional amendment can be passed,” according to Marc Fisher of the Washington Post. Gohmert made no mention regarding DC residents potential military service.

And, by the way, a constitutional amendment would be the proper path to take for granting a member of Congress to DC, but supporters have seen the writing on the wall in previous failed attempts. The last attempt suffered defeat in 1985 when the amendment passed both houses in 1978, but the clock expired after a seven year limit to garner three-quarters of the state legislatures approval failed with only 16 states on board. This new vote by Congress is an attempt to sneak in through the back door.

Article I, Section 8: “…The Congress shall have Power To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of Government of the United States…”

Hoyer is using this Section as his way in the front door suggesting that the House can vote to grant DC its member of Congress. Why then, has this interpretation not been used in the past? It would seem that this Section grants Congress the authority to govern over the District and write and pass its laws.

The parenthetical “not exceeding ten Miles square” is interesting as if the framers limited the size of the seat of the nation’s government, it would not want to encourage a constant burgeoning of population to overflow its borders. Instead, it would seem the framers sought to limit the size of the government and thus the number of people who served in it. The framers did not intend to have people make the District a permanent home, instead it expected members of Congress would come to DC serve a couple of terms and then return to their lives as farmers, small businessmen, clerics, doctors, etc. Likewise their staffs, small that they were to be, as well as the people in the employ of the federal government. Constant turnover would keep people from growing roots in DC and losing touch with the folks back home.

Sadly, this has not happened and the District is 69 square miles. Carve out the residential neighborhoods including perimeter shopping and non-government businesses for annexation by Maryland. Those with concerns about its shape only need to look at some of the terribly misshapen Congressional districts in the name of seat preservation. It’s enough to cause Elbridge Gerry to turn over in his grave.

Article II, Section 1: “…Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the Number of Senators and Representatives to which the state may be entitled in the Congress…”

See Article I, Sections 2 and 3.

Amendment XXIII: “The District constituting the seat of the Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:

            A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole numbers of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State…” (Ratified March 29, 1961; all three of the District of Columbia’s electoral votes have been cast for the Democratic candidate for president in every election since 1964.)

As far as I am concerned, the 23^rd Amendment is in direct violation of the Constitution – Article II, Section 1, and the desires of the framers by awarding DC its three electoral votes. The District of Columbia was designed to be the seat of the government and not a permanent dwelling for the masses.

The notion of a compromise, as suggested by former Congressman Tom Davis (R-VA), to give a member of Congress to DC and one to Utah simply because the Beehive State would be the next state due an additional member plays fast and loose with the Constitution. Would this even be up for discussion if Utah were not such an overwhelmingly Republican state? But that it is, does not guarantee its permanence. This leads down the slippery slope which can only end up with DC being granted two federal senators. This would be two virtually permanent Democratic strongholds as voters in DC trend eight to one for the Democrats.

Bottom line is DC is not a state and should not have state status, for that same slippery slope may lead to American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. Those territories and possessions are not states either, but what the hell, let’s give them statehood privileges of congressmen and senators as well. Sound silly? So does nationalization of the banks, but that frightening possible reality will have to be the subject of another column on another day.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and political consultant living in Alexandria, VA.