Democrat Lame Duck follies are a moral violation against America

In no way can it be imagined that the governed consented to this.

Some things are just wrong, even if they are legal. Some things are dishonorable to such a degree that the perpetrators ought to be scorned and shunned from civil society. The perpetrators of the 2010 Lame Duck follies — chief among them Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi — are reprobates of that order. The rest of them are scarcely better for having lent their votes.

I hold these points to be facts:

• The Democrats were shellacked on November 2, a long-expected result, losing the most (63) of one party since 1938, and giving Republicans a commanding majority of 242-193 in the upcoming Congress.
• It is ridiculous to interpret the election results as less than a thorough repudiation by the voters of what Democrats had done for 2 years.
• The Democrats planned this Lame Duck session long in advance.
• The Democrats planned long in advance to exploit the lack of accountability inherent in a Lame Duck session.

It’s not a question of whether this bill passed, or that measure was enacted, or such-and-such deal was struck during this session, or even whether and to what degree Republicans ought to have accepted compromises. Having lost in November, Democrats were not tone deaf. They heard the message. They decided they were going to jam their agenda through Congress in spite of the expressed will of America.

It is an act of moral depravity to plan and use a Lame Duck session to accomplish an agenda intended to thwart the expressed will of the governed.

Thomas Jefferson penned a masterpiece during the latter days of June 1776, and not just in the way he told the Crown 26 reasons and no less than 3 ways to stick it. Channeling John Locke and the hearts of the freedom-loving Americans, he voiced thoughts that are as grand today as they were then:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

Allow me to reconstruct the grammar to emphasize something I want understood.

We hold this truth to be self-evident, that to secure these unalienable rights (Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness), Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

The only legitimate powers of the government are those derived by the consent of the governed. Those powers are given to secure the rights of the citizens, and for no other purpose.

The Constitution, in all ways possible, ratified the doctrine of Consent of the Governed: the three branches of government, none free of each other, all accountable to each other, and ultimately, all accountable to the citizens by free and frequent elections; the safeguards built in to prevent the tyranny of a temporary and slim majority; the high bar required to change the terms of the Constitution; the Bill of Rights, whose specific purpose was to serve as an additional bulwark for the people against government tyranny.

The spirit and letter of the Constitution can be abused, but it cannot be abused by honorable men. Elected Presidents, Representatives and Senators are guardians of a sacred trust. Those seats do not belong to them; they belong to the governed. This Lame Duck session is a gross violation of that trust. The betrayal, the perfidy displayed by those conducting it, mark them as despicable people unworthy of the responsibility given them.

The Democrats of Congress are morally wrong. They are evil, and that’s perfectly obvious because they show themselves ungoverned by a even a shred of internal decency, or by respect for a Constitution or a Republic they were entrusted to govern.

[37 comments][38 recommends,14 by Caballistas]