Obama’s Keystone Veto Message PROVES Rumors Of the Constitution’s Death Are True – James Madison handed down a real Constitutional Veto
Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – “If you’re a citizen and you’re not mortified by that to quit national politics, I don’t know what will make you quit. It’s over, folks. There is no Constitution. There is no conception of a constitution. As the difference between Madison and Obama’s veto should make plainly clear, James Madison was trying to do his best, was trying to obey the document that actually made him the President of the United States. Obama does not even acknowledge that.” Check out today’s transcript AND Clip of The Day for the rest….
FOLKS, a message from Mike – The Clip of The Day videos, Project 76 features, Church Doctrine videos and everything else on this site are supported by YOU. We have over 70, of my personally designed, written, produced and directed products for sale in the Founders Tradin’ Post, 24/7, here. You can also support our efforts with a Founders Pass membership granting total access to years of My work for just .17 cents per day. Not convinced? Take the tour! Thanks for 18 years of mike church.com! – Mike
HERE’S YOUR FREE AUDIO PREVIEW OF THIS CLIP OF THE DAY – TO HEAR THE ENTIRE EPISODE JOIN FOUNDERS PASS NOW AND FOR A LIMITED TIME YOU CAN SIGN UP AT A 50% DISCOUNT-HURRY WHILE THE PROMOTION LASTS!
[private |FP-Monthly|FP-Yearly|FP-Yearly-WLK|FP-Yearly-So76|Founding Brother|Founding Father|FP-Lifetime]
Begin Mike Church Show Transcript
Mike: Let’s go to the fabled U.S. Constitution first and let’s go to Article I, Section 7: “Every Bill which shall have passed, the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it becomes a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it.” Of course, you can override it with two-thirds vote in both houses. I’m not breaking any news here. Most people know how this works, or they should know how it works.
I was looking at this earlier today. Let me now read something to you.
March 3, 1817
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
Having considered the bill this day presented to me entitled “An act to set apart and pledge certain funds for internal improvements,” and which sets apart and pledges funds “for constructing roads and canals, and improving the navigation of water courses, in order to facilitate, promote, and give security to internal commerce among the several States, and to render more easy and less expensive the means and provisions for the common defense,” I am constrained by the insuperable difficulty I feel in reconciling the bill with the Constitution of the United States to return it with that objection to the House of Representatives, in which it originated.
The legislative powers vested in Congress are specified and enumerated in the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution, and it does not appear that the power proposed to be exercised by the bill is among the enumerated powers, or that it falls by any just interpretation with the power to make laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution those or other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States. [Mike: There are 16 more paragraphs.]
President of the United States
Mike: That’s a veto.
David Simpson: Of just a normal bill that we would take for granted today, right?
Mike: To build a road. That’s a veto message. That’s how you veto a bill. I now take you to the year of our Lord and Savior Jesum Christum, 2015 Anno Domini, February 24.
To the Senate of the United States:
I am returning herewith without my approval S. 1, the “Keystone XL Pipeline Approval Act.” Through this bill, the United States Congress attempts to circumvent longstanding and proven processes for determining whether or not building and operating a cross-border pipeline serves the national interest.
The Presidential power to veto legislation is one I take seriously. But I also take seriously my responsibility to the American people. And because this act of Congress conflicts with established executive branch procedures and cuts short thorough consideration of issues that could bear on our national interest — including our security, safety, and environment — it has earned my veto.
Simpson: Did he mention the Constitution? I think he actually did.
Mike: No, he did not.
Simpson: I thought he threw the word in there just for good measure.
Mike: No, he did not mention the Constitution. He did not cite a clause. He cited the national interest. I’m sorry, I don’t find the national interest in Article I, Section 8.
Simpson: We know what that is, it’s his interest.
Mike: If you’re a citizen and you’re not mortified by that to quit national politics, I don’t know what will make you quit. It’s over, folks. There is no Constitution. There is no conception of a constitution. As the difference between Madison and Obama’s veto should make plainly clear, James Madison was trying to do his best, was trying to obey the document that actually made him the President of the United States. Obama does not even acknowledge that. Bush before him didn’t acknowledge it. They don’t even acknowledge the power that the Constitution is giving them. Instead you get these vagueries, these ambiguities about “national interest” and “concerns of the American people.”
Simpson: And the environment, don’t forget the environment.
Mike: An eighth grader could have written this and would have gotten an F on it. You’d flunk Hannah out of seventh grade homeschooling if she turned this in. The construction of the grammar is awful. I’m just – okay, that’s – [tearing up paper]. That’s what I’ve got to say about that.
Simpson: You can’t veto a veto, can you?
Mike: I just vetoed Obama’s veto. That is as worthless as the paper it’s printed on, but it’s not surprising to you or to me. I am shocked, though, that it ought to be surprising – as a matter of fact, I might write a piece about this today and submit it to Jordan Bloom so he can publish it at The Daily Caller, just comparing the two vetoes. James Monroe came right behind Madison. They tried the same thing. As soon as the ink was dry on Monroe’s inaugural, Henry Clay tried the exact same thing, same bill, almost identical. They passed it again saying: Monroe’s dumb. He’s got a ball in his shoulder. He’s lanky. He was a Neanderthal. He’ll sign it. Monroe went: No, I won’t. He gave the same reasons. Monroe even said in his veto: You want this, you need an amendment.
Simpson: For all the errors we do find in some of our founding stuff, we do know that they tried. They tried to live by what they call the rule of law. That term has completely fallen out of our expressions so we don’t have it now. Now we have rule of men, which is basically a tyranny. We have a soft one now, a relatively soft one, but it’s getting harder every day. We all recognize it.
Mike: This is a term that another radio host uses often, soft tyranny. What we mean by that – he didn’t create the term.
Simpson: I didn’t know anybody used it. I just kind of threw that out there out of my own –
Mike: You’re going to get accused of that now and I’m going to get hate mail saying, [mocking] “I heard your boy ripping Mark Levin off.”
Simpson: I had no idea. I don’t even listen to – I’ve never listened to Mark Levin in my life.
Mike: I’m just telling you that that’s coming to me later on today. I will forward it to you so that you can then say –
Simpson: I will send vetoes to all those people, my own personal veto.
Mike: What’s meant by soft tyranny is that you have an absence of the rule of law. They’re not enforcing the absence of the rule of law with violence yet. That’s soft tyranny. When they get to hard tyranny, then we start getting drawn and quartered and hanged and burned at the stake and executed, or rode out in the middle of rivers with holes in the boats and stripped naked so you can sink together to the bottom with French people watching with wine and cheese on the side and cheering it on.
Simpson: Enjoying the spectacle.
Mike: Enjoying the spectacle, right. That’s a hard tyranny.
Simpson: A little harder than the one we’ve got.
Mike: The Obama tyranny, which was preceded by the Bush tyranny – which most of you conservatives will not admit to, and it most certainly was tyrannical – which was preceded by the Clinton tyranny, which was preceded by the Bush 41 tyranny, which was preceded by another – at least President Reagan, I believe, was the last president who attempted, he wasn’t very successful, but he did attempt to be like a James Madison.
Simpson: He spoke about stuff like that at least.
Mike: I wonder if I could go back and find veto messages from President Reagan. He was dealing with a Democrat Congress the whole time he was in office. For only two years did he have a Republican Senate. Was it the first two years or the last two years?
Simpson: I think it was the last.
Mike: It was the last two years with Gramm-Rudman-Hollings. That came during the Reagan administration, an attempt. They knew they were out of control. Senator Warren Rudman and Phil Gramm and Fritz Hollings – there are two Democrats and one Republican. No, Gramm was a Republican and so was Rudman; Hollings was a Democrat. They knew that the writing was on the wall, that the deficits were going to get larger, and that the Congress and the country were spiraling out of control. They knew it, which is why you had Gramm-Rudman-Hollings and the deficit reduction act, which they were supposed to obey as law when Bush 41 became president, and, of course, they didn’t. As soon as a new congress was voted in, they went: Wahoo!
Simpson: It’s not very popular anymore, but back then I read a book called Bankruptcy 1995. It was one of the guys on the commission to talk about how we had to curb our spending or else we were done.
Mike: This was the Grace Commission. Again, President Reagan called the Grace Commission together. His cabinet chose the members of the Grace Commission. What was the purpose of the Grace Commission?
Simpson: It was to find those places where we can start curbing spending, generating revenue, and stop the onslaught of bankruptcy for the United States.
Mike: Again, President Reagan made honest efforts and attempts. Give the Gipper credit. He tried.
End Mike Church Show Transcript