And patriotic American citizens, who supported an America first policy, did not like GW.
JWK
When a Republican Legislator demands a national ban on abortions, or a Democrat Legislator demands a total unregulated access to abortion, both are domestic enemies of Federalism, our Constitution’s plan, and need to be excoriated for the traitors they are in wanting to exercise authoritarian power over the states and people therein.
.
Seems to me Mike Pence embraces President Biden using government force to eliminate his most formidable political rival.
Keep in mind that this is the same Mike Pence who has acknowledged he supports federal legislation which would send people to jail if they violate his personal beliefs with regard to abortions, even though the Tenth Amendment forbids such legislation.
JWK
When a Republican Legislator demands a national ban on abortions, or a Democrat Legislator demands a total unregulated access to abortion, both are domestic enemies of Federalism, our Constitution’s plan, and need to be excoriated for the traitors they are in wanting to exercise authoritarian power over the states and people therein.
VP Pence didn’t have the Constitutional authority to send it back to the states since all 50 states and DC already certified their Electoral College votes on December 14, 2020.
And where in the Constitution is Congress authorized to adopt and enforce S. 61, the, Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which Mike Pence supports? See:
Why does Mike Pence give his finger to Federalism, our Constitution’s plan, and openly confirm he is willing to jail people who do not agree with his beliefs, and also gives his finger to the protection of the Tenth Amendment?
JWK
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation ___ Declaration of Independence
STATEMENT posted to BING:
S. 61, the, “pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act”, if passed and enforced, would violate the Tenth Amendment which reserves to the States and people therein the regulation of abortion.
Seems to me our media has once again dropped the ball. Not one person in our media, to the best of my knowledge and who has interviewed Mike Pence, or written about his campaign, has raised the question, how can he support our Constitution and also be loyal to his oath of affirmation when he supports specific federal legislation (S. 61, the, Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act), SOURCE, which would put American citizens in jail for not complying with his personal views on abortion, and would also violate the agreed upon protection of Federalism, our Constitution’s plan, by violating the Tenth Amendment.
JWK
“If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection [federalism] was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?”___ Justice Story
That is not the Veep’s duty. He had no right to do that, nor the power. His role was ceremonial.
The fact that even the most right wing media is not covering this is probably an indicator they dont think its as important as you do.
Pence is not going to be President so its irrelevant what he thinks hence why media are not that interested.
“Right wing media”? I have no idea what that is, or why you make that sophomoric reference to arrive at your conclusion.
Having said that, I happen to believe when someone, especially someone as prominent as a former Vice President, is running for an office of public trust and emphatically confirms in public they support federal legislation which would put American Citizens in jail for not abiding by that candidate’s personal beliefs regarding abortion, and said legislation, if enforced, would be a blatant subjugation of Federalism, our Constitution’s plan, and specifically would violate the Tenth Amendment, that fact certainly seems to be news worthy in my opinion, and ought to be reported on.
Additionally, anyone interviewing that candidate ought to question them as to why they would sign legislation that runs afoul of our Constitution in such a blatant manner, and especially when our Supreme Court has recently confirmed the subject matter of abortion is one reserved to the regulatory powers of the various states, and people therein.
JWK
Why have a written constitution, approved by the people, if those who it is meant to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?
Do you have to turn everything into an argument?
I was making a point about ALL media.
No one is going to start asking detailed constitutional questions because it will take far longer to go back and forth vs the time they have.
I am not saying you do not have valid questions just pointing out the constraints media works in.
Now that is more than special considering the argumentative comments you posted.
As to the media not " . . . asking detailed constitutional questions because it will take far longer to go back and forth vs the time they have . . . ", where were you when the draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, was leaked, and the popular media outlets were obsessed with expressing absurd and groundless arguments why overturning Roe vs Wade was an attack on constitutional guarantees and the Fourteenth Amendment?
Aside from that, when a candidate who is running to be president of the United States confirms they would support adopting specific federal legislation, which violates our Constitution and would send American Citizens to jail unjustly, I am at a loss to understand why our media has avoided, thus far, confronting that candidate and asking why they are willing to ignore our Nation’s rule book, and use an office of public trust to impose their personal predilections as the rule of law upon the States and people therein.
JWK
“Any excuse will serve a tyrant.” – Aesop
I give up mate. Maybe you should contact the media outlets and ask them why. All we have on this site is opinions.
You’re making an apples to oranges comparison here.
In any event, it’s not getting coverage because Pence isn’t getting any coverage.
Is that the ruling of a court, or merely your own opinion?
I presented factual content establishing the duplicity of Mike Pence who says out of one side of his mouth he supports our Constitution, and out the other side he supports specific legislation which would put American citizens in in jail if they do not adhere to his beliefs regarding abortion ____ specific legislation which subjugates Federalism, our Constitution’s plan, and violates the Tenth Amendment.
JWK
When a Republican Legislator demands a national ban on abortions, or a Democrat Legislator demands a total unregulated access to abortion, both are domestic enemies of Federalism, our Constitution’s plan, and need to be excoriated for the traitors they are in wanting to exercise authoritarian power over the states and people therein.
Not my opinion, it is the opinion of Pence, of his legal team, of his trusted advisors like Judge Luttig and Former Veep Quayle. And almost every Constitutional scholar. Even Trump’s team admitted it wasn’t legal, they just wanted to muddy the waters long enough for a hail mary from the states.
Comparing the media reaction to Dobbs with the lack of reaction to a national ban proposed by a fourth tier candidate is absolutely a apples to oranges comparison.
You identifying Mike Pence, our previous Vice President, as a “fourth tier candidate” to diminish the significance of his willingness to put American citizens in jail for not adhering to his beliefs regarding abortion, is confirmation you yourself do not even believe your absurd apples to oranges comment.
When a person of such stature boasts, as former Vice President Mike Pence did, about his willingness to blatantly subjugate our Constitution and put American citizens in jail if they violate his beliefs on abortion, that, my friend, is significant news and ought to be pursued by our media.
JWK
Why have a written constitution, approved by the people, if those who it is meant to control are free to make it mean whatever they wish it to mean?
So, it is an “opinion” void of legal substantiation.
Thank you for clearing that up for us.
JWK
