Lawfully Speaking" Vol. III, Issue No. 5
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. Huff

supreme* Court Justice Antonin Scalia must think he is living in a Democracy instead of a Constitutional Republic with a written Constitution. He apparently thinks we need a Constitutional Amendment to stop a National ID Card when it would in fact require an Amendment to create one, since the jurisdiction for a truly universal National ID card would overleap the bounds of federal jurisdiction.

Jefferson and Madison stand to say: "Dear Mr. Scalia, The argument that 'if the Constitution doesn't say we can't do it, we can' is a violation of your Oath on its face. You know better!" Any child who reads the Ratification Documents of the States can discount such nonsense out-of-hand. And yes, children can read those documents if they are not already dumbed down by government-controlled Outcome-Based Education.

Lawfully Speaking, Vol. III, Issue No. 4
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. Huff

"The most effectual engines for [pacifying a nation] are the public papers... [A despotic] government always [keeps] a kind of standing army of newswriters who, without any regard to truth or to what should be like truth, [invent] and put into the papers whatever might serve the ministers. This suffices with the mass of the people who have no means of distinguishing the false from the true paragraphs of a newspaper." --Thomas Jefferson to G. K. van Hogendorp, Oct. 13, 1785. (*) ME 5:181, Papers 8:632

Here we see that Jefferson would have cringed at the notion of a politically correct press as the result of 200 years of so-called free government. He was revolted by the first appearances of government censorship and knew only too well where it would lead.

Lawfully Speaking, Vol. III, Issue No. 2
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. Huff

It is not enough anymore to simply report "All The News That's Fit to Print." Most media have an agenda. That's ok - as long as the reader is fully aware. But just what constitutes "fully-awareness?"

The problem is, even those who have good intent are not equipping their readers for critical thinking and informed lawful action. They are so narrow in their own general knowledge as well as political acumen that they have no choice but to be shallow. They don't realize that America would have few problems of such earth shaking consequence if she were only to faithfully remember her founding principles and intelligently apply them. This requires journalism with a truly American agenda by a media properly steeped in Americanism. Perhaps, most tragically, many of the very best writers of our time have sophisticated knowledge and powerful communications skills, but almost no direct exposure to the written laws of the United States, having believed their spoon-feeding from "certified" government sources and government licensed attorneys, or, worse yet, so-called think tanks.

Lawfully Speaking, Vol III, Issue No. 1
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. Huff

Have we descended so close to bottom of the pit of national ignorance that we now see the passing over of government responsibilities as a "change" of government? What in the world is the Media talking about when they call an inauguration the "Peaceful Transfer of Power?" Yet, I have heard this many times lately, as if it were another Mantra for American Brainwashing 101. Are we supposed to believe there has been a revolution in this country, or a coup d'état whenever the allegedly opposite party takes over the White House?

What rubbish!

Lawfully Speaking Vol II, Issue No. 5
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. Huff

The word "conservative" has evolved in common usage from an adjective into more application as a noun. If I am a member of the "conservative movement," I am considered to be a "conservative." Along with that I find that there is a list of assumptions pigeon-holing me so that I must be easily classified as one who is opposed to all things "liberal."

"Liberal" on the other hand has evolved into a term for many "bad" things that "conservatives" oppose. The "us" and "them" camps are currently defined in media and education in this fashion which clouds reason and mires debate.

It was not always this way. Further, an understanding of the illustrious past of the word "liberal" reveals that many who are proud to wear the name "conservative" now, would probably have considered it an insult not to be called a "liberal" in our not too distant past.