top of page
  • Writer's picturePhilip Drucker

Communique "Ticked-off Tok!" 5-25-2021

Ticked-off Tock!

With all the talk about bi-partisan, or more accurately the lack of between Democrats and what’s left of the Republican Party I’m beginning to wonder if it isn’t time for a refresher course in basic Constitutional analysis going all the way back and beginning with did he Original Framers intend for America to be a two-party system with not one but two sides working together to form a more perfect union?

The answer is no. There is no mention of the need for or direction as to what political parties would look like in the Constitution. None. It’s just not there. Could this have been an oversight?

There are any number of issues pertinent to the running of a modern, efficient government dedicated to the principles of democracy by representation, aka a one person, one vote system whereby we elect those persons who we believe will best serve our interests as Americans, but nothing more.

Surely it cannot be denied the Founding Fathers knew about the Tories and Whigs, the two dominant political parties in England at the time of the American Revolution and for the most part voiced their displeasure with the negative effects associated with the clash of two political rivals who at the time seemed to exist for no reason other than to vex, hex and heckle each other into a state of near to complete inertia.

In his farewell address, George Washington warned of the evils of political parties and although he himself did not formally belong to one, by the time he left office, he no doubt was aware of the rise of the Federalist and Democratic-Republican Parties (DRP).

With the Federalist, John Adams supporting a strong central government while the Thomas Jefferson led DRP leading the charge for both individual and states’ rights as precedent over those interests associated with a government where both executive and legislative power is concentrated into a centralized, unitary state.

Yet here we are a couple of centuries and change later and we are still complaining about the effects of our two-party political system even though it is doing exactly what the Founders warned us about.

Why, throw in the Electoral College, a device invented for the very purpose of ensuring any number of different candidates from different parties could participate in the presidential election process, another idea that didn’t quite work out, a device that also allowed for a check upon the tyranny of the masses electing an unfit president.

The Original Framers were quite clear that they did not believe it was in the best interests of America to seat a self-interested and greedy man of low moral character, as the person to run the Country, regardless of the sheer number of morons in the public who would have voted for the very person who would deny them the life and liberty, free from the colonial ambitions of King George and England the true patriots fought and died for during the American Revolution. Guess we didn’t listen to that warning either, did we?

Yet, all is not lost and in a world where it’s never too late to do the right thing, let’s ask ourselves, what exactly do we want our representatives in Washington DC to do? Firstly, we want them to follow the US Constitution. In fact, there is no reason we shouldn’t demand they do so as it is not actually optional.

We are a land committed to the rule of law dedicated to liberty, justice and equality, for all. A place where everyone is created equally and not even the highest of the high, president is above the law. We have a deal and it is called the social compact whereby a fair and just government cannot ignore its duties and obligations to defend the Constitution, with foremost attention they not unduly tread upon the inalienable rights of individuals as defined in Bill of Rights.

Did we miss this lesson too? The answer may lie at the heart of an ongoing conversation we seem to be having daily with our government that usually starts or ends with “What are you waiting for?” Oh, Nancy and Chuck will tell you we must play fair, or angle and jostle in the congressional playpen for mostly unidentified political purposes, you know when the say it’s in all our best interests, but it isn’t?

As individual Americans, is it our Constitutional duty to defer, follow or even allow our representatives to proceed? Often as the wish for no discernible reason except to ensure enough dark money flows into their campaign coffers all but assuring their re-election? Fortunately, the answer is no, we don’t and it is here where we must demand our rights for our representatives, civil servants who sometimes lead, have our back.

How can they do that? There are several outstanding issues right now that all parties, political or otherwise agree need to be addressed with an eye toward a resolution, a reckoning if necessary, to hold all participants in the January 6, 2021 insurrection accountable for their un-American and clearly unconstitutional acts against We, the People.

Let’s start. I’ll go first. Why is Marjorie Taylor Greene a racist, fungus growing on a back bench still in Congress? After searching tirelessly through the Constitution for an answer, I can safely say I did not find any “We need to keep racist, dumb as a post, 2nd Amendment gun lobby shill for your right to commit one mass shooting after another in her seat Clause” so we’re good there.

I also want to mention just to make sure, I checked to see if there was a Marjorie Taylor Greene Clause (you never know) but alas, no such animal exists in the Constitution. Now, for those of you who want to make a go of this Constitution thing should remember that even if certain words, phrases, or even ideas do not appear in the black letters of the document itself, the Constitution is based on the theory of inclusion before exclusion, especially if the resolution of the issue’s constitutionality is necessary to the protection of the “substance” of due process. This doctrine is unsurprisingly known as “Substantive Due Process” (SDP).

This, is why although the Constitution makes no mention of abortion, a woman’s right to have one, can be found under the Privacy (another term not specifically mentioned) line of cases regarding the familial right to privacy, meaning as little government intervention as possible, in the families’ rights to make decisions for itself in matters relating to the who what when where and why of all things children including procreation finds its authority.

If this SDP sounds akin to a treasure hunt for rights along the lines of “it must be in there somewhere”, you are right. That is essentially how it works. So, assuming there is no substantive right for Marjorie to remain in office (there isn’t), Mr. Congressman, again, why is she still there?

The question becomes elevated when we consider all the clauses in the Constitution that tell us to a great degree what constitutional options we do have regarding an officer who has shown themselves unfit to serve.

The low hanging fruit of the traitor Taylor Greene tree would be found in Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 of the Constitution under which each house of Congress can discipline or punish its own members for at a minimum, “disorderly behavior”. The results of an official proceeding may include expulsion, censure, reprimand and fines. Sounds good to me, accent on the expulsion for failure to maintain the integrity and reputation of Congress.

Further, as we are dealing with a figure widely associated with because she keeps bragging about it as if it was something good thereby incriminating herself by admission, Marjorie is a traitor. And wouldn’t you know it, the only crime described under Article III, Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution is treason.

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

Once again, sounds good to me, with the possible penalties available under current federal law being a lengthy prison sentence or, yes you guessed it, death. Still up for all that righteous death penalty stuff Marjorie? I’d say think twice, but that would require you to think once, a feat I sincerely am not sure your whatever drug please don’t tell me you were born this way addled brain is still capable of. Oh, and Maj, please feel free to prove me wrong, please?

Along the same lines, bi-partisan official investigation into the events of the January 6, 2021 Insurrection where half of the perpetrators want to be their own judge and jury into whether they themselves are seditious traitors or not? On top of sounding ridiculous on the surface, no, you will find no such constitutional clause.

Must we as individuals call upon our elected officials, Chuck, Nancy? Are you listening? To do their job? What are you waiting for? And let’s all keep in mind there is nothing in the Constitution that requires bi-partisan anything. Here that West Virginia Senator and ALEC shill Joe Manchin? Yes, this note is for you buddy! Why, there isn’t even a guarantee of a two-party system. Congress makes the laws and the president carries them out.

Let’s keep it simple and real. Speaking of simple, the Filibuster? Yes, that doesn’t have any Constitutional authority. It is nothing but a construct, an internal totally voluntary and recently much abused rule of conduct within the Senate. The Party in the majority gets to make the rules.

Are the Democrats sincerely trying to tell us they would deny Americans their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness based on a parliamentary parlor trick in modern times used most effectively by racists to deny Americans of color their rights? OK.

So, Chuck, what are you waiting for? Please don’t tell me it’s to allow Joe Manchin a chance at saving “democracy” by perpetuating a two-party system the Founding Fathers never wanted and repeatedly warned us about?

The time for legitimate legislative change by adhering and applying nothing more than basic Constitutional Law and theory is upon us. It’s here. We did our part and demand the democratically elected majorities do likewise. So, what are you waiting for?

Like My Blog? Buy Me An Hourglass? Or...A Glass An Hour?

7 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page