When Fed officials pledge to "protect and defend the Constitution", many don't mean it.

****FoxNews is replete with clips of Congressmen actually saying that they "don't care about the Constitution". The President has been complaining for years that the Constitution only has negative rights and needs positive ones. His close advisor, Cass Sunstein wrote a book on the need for a Second Constitution. Another advisor, Harold Koh, insists that precedents from other judicial systems should trump the U.S. Constitution. The "internationalist" bias of the Left stems in large measure from the Constitutional mandate that, if a treaty is signed and approved by 2/3 of the Senate, it becomes the "supreme" law of the land, whether Constitutional or not.* It's no wonder Obama doesn't believe in American exceptionalism: he doesn't believe in the Constitution which underlies it.***
http://tinyurl.com/yce76s3
ObamaCare and the Constitution If Congress can force you to buy insurance, Article I limits on federal power are a dead letter.
The constitutional challenges to ObamaCare have come quickly, and the media are portraying them mostly as hopeless gestures—the political equivalent of Civil War re-enactors. Discussion over: You lost, deal with it.
The press corps never dismissed the legal challenges to the war on terror so easily, but then liberals have long treated property rights and any limits on federal power to regulate commerce as 18th-century anachronisms. In fact, the legal challenges to ObamaCare are serious and carry enormous implications for the future of American liberty.
The most important legal challenge turns on the "individual mandate"—the new requirement that almost every U.S. citizen must buy government-approved health insurance. Failure to comply will be punished by an annual tax penalty that by 2016 will rise to $750 or 2% of income, whichever is higher. President Obama opposed this kind of coercion as a candidate but has become a convert. He even argued in a September interview that "I absolutely reject that notion" that this tax is a tax, because it is supposedly for your own good.****An interesting point. What constrains the limits on the penalty for this "good-for-you-hence-not-a-tax? How about $1M for infractions? Why was Prohibition ( which, incidentally, didn't work, created a criminal industry and had to be countermanded ) a Constitutional Amendment? According to Obama, everyone could be required to take injections that make ingestion of alcohol noxiously nauseating, the penalty for not being $1M enforced by the IRS -- Prohibition was also enforced by agents of the Treasury Department! -- . Banning Demon Rum could have been done by a simple act of
Congress. One must realize that the logical tool of reductio ad absurdum doesn't work to debunk the thinking of the Left: it's often merely a starting point for them.**** Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and 13 other state AGs—including Louisiana Democrat Buddy Caldwell—claim this is an unprecedented exercise of state power. Never before has Congress required people to buy a private product to qualify as a law-abiding citizen... ****Obama makes much and often of his "teaching Constitutional Law." Several points have to be made ( and never are in the MSM):
1) he was not a professor at the UofC Law School or anywhere else.
2) he never published a scholarly paper and, hence, had the title only of "Senior Lecturer" reserved for non-academics.
3) Teaching something doesn't mean you understand the subject. Often, those with bizarre views of a subject are invited to lecture on the grounds that students should be exposed to different points of view so that they can think for themselves.
4) When Obama is constantly told by his sycophants that he is "the smartest guy in the room" ( or, according to David Brooks, has the best-creased pants ), he tends to believe it and his own omniscience. This is especially dangerous when it ain't so. As the old saw ends, "He who knows not, and knows not he knows not, he is a fool, SHUN HIM." ****