What content we have been trying to address here is that many similarly troubling judicial actions that add up to an entrenched pattern of government by judges that is nothing less than the usurpation of politics. We agree that this title of The Usurpation of Politics can be confusing to some; however, as we continue to look upon our language and study it, we come to the realization that no political correctness will enter into our findings. It has always been the position of this site that one being “p.c.” has always been about the changes in the native language first, then comes the liberal leaning words in replacement of the original, and the end consequence is none other than changes in morality, ethics, and values that invariably destroy the fortitude of the Nation.
The question then before us then is whether we have reached or are reaching the point where conscientious citizens can no longer give moral assent to the existing regime. The subject before us therefore, is this the end of democracy? As stated in earlier portions of this writing is that the United States has for so long been the primary bearer of the democratic idea — has itself betrayed that idea and become something else all together?
Democratic politics means that “the people” deliberate and decide the questions before them of How ought we to order our lives together? One of the biggest problems that faces us today is, in fact, that too many answers to these questions are not deliberated, debated, and/or sent to our representatives who are allegedly representing us.
We believe much as the Framer’s did that given just the size of the federal government would be and is a definite problem. Or may I ask when was the last time any President asked for [demanded] a $4 trillion increase in taxes to cover entitlements and people not authorized to be in the country. These are just two of the increases and should not be used as the only reasons. One could easily put the debunked Head Start program as well as Free Community College for those who want it into that same mix.
However, it is important to note that what caused the Founder’s to implement “The Law of the Land” or the US Constitution we argue is their beliefs about and proven human nature. The very argument about the separation of powers has its basis in the notion that through human nature one person could and would aspire to recklessly make decisions — decisions that are not in his charter to make.
Therefore given that the original Constitution is what 2 1/2 pages in length and now — through the provisions, amending process, and judicial activism the Constitution can fill a library with almost endless provisions — incidentally all of these proviso’s were not done by any legislative deliberations or public opinion polling; the proviso’s added to the Constitution have been primarily done by the Justices who sit on the United States Supreme Court.
All things being equal it has been concluded with a dire evaluation of the present situation: “What is happening now is a growing alienation of millions of Americans from a government they do not recognize as theirs; what is happening now is an erosion of moral adherence to the political system.”
Of interest to all of us working on this topic is Robert Bork’s best-selling book in 1989, The Tempting of America: The Political Seduction of the Law, where Bork argues to a minute degree that Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment had been, in the hands of the modern Supreme Court, as an act of “judicial imperialism.”
Furthermore Bork espoused that “The most important moral, political, and cultural decisions affecting our lives are steadily being removed from democratic control — A majority of the Supreme Court routinely enacts its own preference as the command of the Constitution — A majority of Justices have decided to rule us without any warrant in law.”