Oath to people, not to Norquist
Before any senator or representative to the U.S. Congress can serve their elected role, they swear the Congressional Oath of Office.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
The Congressional Oath of Office requires observance to the Constitution of the United States, which is the government of the People of the United States.
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
The Congressional Oath of Office is an oath to the people of the United States. It establishes that the duty of Congress is to the people of the United States. Nothing in the Congressional Oath of Office or the Constitution of the United States requires fealty to Grover Norquist. In fact, any pledge to Grover Norquist or to any other party must absolutely be subservient to the Congressional Oath of Office and the Constitution of the United States.
Congressmen and Senators work for the people of the United States, not Grover Norquist or the Republican Party or the Democratic Party or any other party. Some of our elected representatives seem to have lost sight of their responsibilities.
It’s time Congress serves the people of the United States, not Grover Norquist.
Norquist is a Libertarian, and is on the advisory board of GOProud, a political organization for homosexuals and transgendered people. Maybe the next Grover Norquist pledge will be for same-sex marriage.
— William Adams
Reps should resist new anti-gun laws
In light of recent tragedies, our senators and congressmen will be coming under intense pressure from the anti-gunners during the next session. Gun owners are not to blame for the actions of lunatics as we all well know. Each of us needs to reach out to these senators and congressmen and ask them to stand fast in the defense of Hoosier citizens by allowing no new anti-gun laws to pass. No ammo bans, no capacity bans, no gun bans, no new restrictions.
Only one thing could have stopped a crazy man, bent on murder and suicide from killing those kids and teachers. That’s an armed law enforcement officer, school employee or citizen.
It’s no coincidence that this kind of crime happens where people are banned from defending themselves. Criminals are drawn to the helpless like moths to a light.
Our teachers, principals, janitors, office and maintenance staff who can responsibly carry a firearm need to be allowed and encouraged to do so immediately. Having a few National Guard members armed and ready in the schools wouldn’t be a bad idea either. The kids need to see and know they will be protected. And, all the potential mass killers out there need to see it and know it too. There is a Texas school district which has encouraged armed teachers and administrators with no problems since 2007.
Lastly, to the dismay of our enemies, America’s citizens are the largest armed force on the face of the earth. No country, no enemy could successfully occupy our homeland while we remain a well-armed people. I hope someone is looking at which foreign governments, political groups or terror groups would most benefit from an America which disarms its citizens and then looking for any contact or influence they may have had with any of these mass killers. This is happening too often for us to ignore this possibility.
— Mike Frye
Examples not to be followed
The “Panic of 1907” might have become the 1930s Great Depression. The same earmarks were there: rapid fall of the stock market and a run on banks.
Money monopolist J. P. Morgan belatedly learned of the panic. He then locked wealthy banker friends in a room until all agreed to provide cash to “bail out” failing banks. The crisis ended.
The quick actions of Morgan clearly showed how runs on banks could be averted; our future should have been brighter than it turned out to be.
There is no evidence that Morgan, nor any monopolist, “held the public hostage to high prices.” Despite that, attacking wealth for political reasons was just as popular in 1907 as it is today. So, by 1913, monopolies had been destroyed and the Federal Reserve had been created to replace Morgan’s bankers as the “lender of last resort.”
Throughout the 1920s, the Fed maintained an easy money policy and the economy “roared.” The Fed did not raise lending rates until late 1928; too late to prevent, and maybe causing, the stock market crash of 1929. Worse yet, when banks started failing, the Fed ignored the Morgan example, actually shrinking the money supply by 7 percent.
A few government decisions had caused America to suffer 12 years of depression.
Morgan’s rescue marked the high-water mark of free economy capitalism. The Depression, today’s “Great Recession” and the “Fiscal Cliff” are a result of the government control that followed; yet, we blindly allow the control to continue.
— Ron Gore