Honest Abe and "the letter and spirit of the Constitution"

Attorney General designate Eric Holder faced the Senate Judiciary Committee for the first time today. He declared he would adhere to the rule of law and follow "the letter and spirit of the Constitution."

I doubt he will face much scrutiny on his previous efforts to explain away the Second Amendment.

The news is filled with coverage of President-elect Obama's Lincoln-themed inauguration. Obama will place his right hand on the same Holy Bible on which Lincoln's rested March 4, 1861, and swear:

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Even in the midst of a terrible war that makes the current one in Afghanistan, Iraq, and in this nation's transportation and financial hubs appear like a mild squabble, Abraham Lincoln never insisted the Second Amendment guaranteed only the right of states to form militias.

In fact he said on that day,

"I take the official oath to-day, with no mental reservations, and with no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws, by any hypercritical rules. And while I do not choose now to specify particular acts of Congress as proper to be enforced, I do suggest that it will be much safer for all, both in official and private stations, to conform to, and abide by, all those acts which stand unrepealed, than to violate any of them, trusting to find impunity in having them held to be unconstitutional. ...

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it."

We do need change, a new birth of freedom, open government, and a renewal of America's promise. We've allowed presidents and senators, attorneys and lobbyists, corporations and other special interests, and Democrats and Republicans to render separation of powers provided for by the Constitution to be meaningless.

The failed economy, dwindling international stature, wars without end, mounting national debt, global trade imbalances, a weak currency--an imbalance of power between branches of government is behind all of it.

When servants of the people such as the president, attorney general or senators are impugn in misinterpreting or ignoring Constitutional safeguards, tyranny grows. Holder's nomination doesn't speak of change. It's still the imbalanced way executive appointments have been handled in Washington for at least the past century. Through the power of appointments, one man can cease being a servant to become a master.

Be True to Your Party or Pay: Kansas Politics

I read this column by Mike Henricks of the Kansas City Star even though I'm not a fan. The head comparing the Kansas GOP to Stalin hooked me.

It details political payback, the branding of traitors by both the Democratic and Republican state leadership. Certain people delete those branded from their smartphones. These traitors cease to exist: no chance of being sent to national conventions, no phone calls or e-mails answered, no invitations to Kansas Day ceremonies at the state capitol every January, and no lovely holiday cards from the powerful. It is worse than being sent to the gulag for a politico. A bullet in the back of the head is certainly more merciful.

I've been a registered Republican since 1979, the Jimmy Carter era. However, I have a strong libertarian streak. I never vote for a candidate who says more "common sense gun safety laws" are needed. Criminals by nature fail to abide by the law. There's plenty of laws on the books that can be used to stop their rampages. So I naturally draw the conclusion those candidates don't trust me or most of my country folk.

If politicians do not trust the ordinary citizens they want to represent, I'm not about to trust them. No matter if they are a Democrat or Republican, why would anyone elect a representative who allowed mistrust to stand between them and their constituents? If sent to any seat of government, they will only answer to party insiders, the big contributors, the lobbyists, and the moguls. The trinkets, junkets, private jets, chauffeurs, interns, hookers, easy cash and power will lure them until they're indicted or voted out of office into a firm of lawyers and lobbyists.

I'm not about to let party loyalty blind me from identifying with the natural and civil rights of individuals. Both parties are bankrupt. There is a reason why the founding fathers, who struggled and made provisions for the preservation of the "inalienable rights of man" did not make a single reference to political parties in the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Dear Leaders, the loyalty squad works via a secret ballot at every election. The Stoic philosopher, Seneca the Younger, said, "Every reign must submit to a greater reign." For those who have left the ranks for a position of authority, Seneca's words are good ones to study.

Eric Holder, the Next Attorney General?

Prez-elect Obama has supposedly asked Eric Holder, former deputy Attorney General during the last months of the Clinton Administration, to serve as the nation's Attorney General. The Senate must confirm the appointment.

For those who haven't heard, Holder played a part in the pardon of Marc Rich, a fugitive commodities trader and Democratic contributor. Rich's ex-wife Denise spent some time in the Lincoln Bedroom when Barbra Streisand and other Clinton donors didn't have it booked. Jack Quinn, Rich's attorney and Clinton's former White House counsel, lobbyied for the pardon directly through Holder.

In January 2008, Holder joined a few other former Justice Department officials including Janet Reno, Attorney General during the Clinton years, in filing a brief in support of the District of Columbia's gun ban in District of Columbia v. Heller. Holder has been the Obama campaign's senior legal advisor since January 2007. He'll follow Obama's lead in viewing the U.S. Constitution as a "living" and evolving document.