The key reason for America’s extraordinary political divide is the growing lack of adherence to the Constitutional foundation of the nation’s government.
In the past, liberals and conservatives mainly battled over methodology, how best to achieve commonly shared goals. Today, the Left sees traditional concepts of individual rights and impartial government as an obstacle to achieving their aspirations. The manner in which national discussions take place has been dramatically altered as well. Even the most bitter debates of prior, turbulent periods were modified by the generally agreed upon (and quintessentially American) concept that “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” (some believe the saying originated with Patrick Henry)
To some, that idea is an outdated concept. In recent years, Loretta Lynch, while serving as attorney general, seriously considered criminally prosecuting those who merely disagreed with the concept of climate change. In 2014, U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced legislation that would have limited the application of the First Amendment. On college campuses, conservative speakers, students, and professors are subjected to harassment.
For the first time in U.S. history, there is serious debate on the basic, constitutional underpinnings of the nation. Earlier this year, some Californians began advocating a ballot initiative to repeal the section of their state laws that recognize the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law. In a January article in The Week, national correspondent Ryan Cooper wrote: “The American Constitution is an outdated, malfunctioning piece of junk — and it’s only getting worse.” Louis Seidman, in a New York Times op-ed, complained about “our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions… Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse.” In 2012, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg stated during an interview on Egyptian television that she wouldn’t recommend the U.S. Constitution as a model. Another Justice, Elena Kagan, refused to acknowledge the inherent concept of inalienable rights during her 2010 confirmation hearing.
These comments are not the work of fringe characters writing in obscure journals, which makes them all the more worrisome.
We commit our secret crimes. viagra no prescription All versions of Kamagra With Energetic Sildenafil Citrate Sildenafil citrate is a world class medicine, prescribed to treat men’s cialis samples erectile dysfunction. Asthma about 5% of the population is affected buy cialis uk with fibromyalgia. Employments of Sildenafil Citrate: Sildenafil Citrate is utilized for treating erectile dysfunction. davidfraymusic.com viagra in uk The acceptability of opposition to Constitutional concepts became commonplace during the Obama Administration. Even Mr. Obama’s supporters were left uneasy with his record. Garret Epps expressed his concern in the Atlantic: “… even for those like me who admire Barack Obama, the constitutional record is disturbingly mixed. Obama leaves the Constitution weaker than at the beginning of his terms.”
The former president’s contempt for Constitutional limitations was evident not primarily in his direct actions, (“I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,”) but in the way he turned the machinery of the federal government into a partisan political engine. This practice was a standard of totalitarian regimes throughout the 20th century that disregarded customary laws.
CATO’s Ilya Shapiro notes that “The Obama administration has been the most lawless in U.S. history …my accusation rests on the 44th president’s seeing himself as professionally above the law, ignoring the executive branch’s legal limits and disrespecting constitutional bounds like federalism and the separation of powers.”
Using the IRS to intimidate the Tea Party, threatening to have the Federal Communications Commission put “monitors” in newsrooms, assuming control of aspects of the internet, using the Environmental Protection Agency to dramatically expand federal power, ignoring the role of the Senate in foreign treaties, all occurred during the Obama Administration. These unconstitutional activities laid the groundwork for the eventual use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to spy on the Trump campaign, cover up Clinton misdeeds, and inflame passions across the nation.
In the absence of widespread deference to Constitutional principles, excesses of power and a general sense of disunity have occurred and will continue to take U.S. politics and discourse to a dark and unprecedented realm.