I like Rand Paul, But…

I like Rand Paul, but in deciding to block Trump’s national emergency declaration we see why Rand can never be President. Senator Paul does not understand that a President can violate the Constitution either of two ways, by exceeding presidential authority, or by not fulfilling that same authority when doing so is necessary to preserve, protect and defend the very purposes of the document. It is a mistake to believe that a President who does nothing to protect the rights of the American people, when a President should act, can claim he or she is acting constitutionally.  Errors of omission are still errors.  The Constitution requires a President to act when the Constitution’s very existence is in peril.  And that’s where we are.

And the mistake of Senator Paul I describe is the same mistake of all the Lincoln haters out there.  I say that because, in the Spring of 1861 had Lincoln not acted when he did, as Trump acts now, there would have been no Constitution left to protect.  That summer Lincoln asked of Congress, "Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak to maintain its own existence?" In cooperating with the Democrats to block President Trump’s national emergency declaration to build the southern border wall, Rand Paul, just like all the Lincoln haters out there, signified his belief in the latter, that when faced with an existential threat to America and the American people, the only constitutional government is the one that does nothing for fear that political foes may complain. If that is true, the Constitution is meaningless.  

Recall that members of Congress take similar oaths as the President, to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." So, what if Congress will not act to fulfill its own Constitutional purpose?  What we have here is a double-edged sword. If Congress cannot or will not act because its members are torn between protecting the rights of the American people on one hand, or promoting their own political agendas on the other, isn’t that very same Congress in violation of its own constitutional oath?  What say, Rand?  And given the fact that Congress already handed the Presidency all authority necessary to decide when a circumstance rises to the level of a national emergency, and subsequently to act on that finding, then any sitting President who does not act accordingly would only do so in violation of the very same Constitution and laws he or she swore an oath to protect and execute.

The US Constitution cannot violate its own purposes. Therefore, should the government described under its terms decide against protecting the rights of the American people, which is the primary constitutional purpose, that government is not a constitutional government.  In 1861, had Lincoln not acted when he did, America would have been over, Constitution gone.  The same is true of Trump’s acts to secure the southern border today.  If Trump does not act, America would remain on the same path of certain destruction. 

And if you do not believe what I am telling you, step back for a moment to 1983. It has been since that time that 15-20 million illegal aliens, who now occupy America along with their offspring, entered our country crossing the border illegally. And ever since, the Democrat Party has embarked on a policy of taking political advantage of that illegal behavior, overtly promoting it. Their purpose of course is to transform illegal aliens into unconstitutional voters, all over the country. And when they are successful, and they will be if not stopped, they will overtake the balance of power in the US Government until any legitimate elected government is completely subdued, defying that same Constitution we’re talking about here. That is when we lose both our Constitution and our country, the last, best hope of earth gone.

Now if in 1983 one could have seen how all of this would play out, would not building a permanent wall to prevent the eventual overthrow of America have been an emergency, even then? Add the ensuing 36 years of inaction to stop illegal border crossings, and the potential of millions of illegal Democrat voters living all across America, soaking America’s pockets and taking advantage of American social programs, and knowing that the effects of all I describe increase geometrically, is Trump not justified by our Constitution to stop it?  And everything Trump has done is according to the will of Congress, which enacted the legislation Trump uses as authority. 

The Constitution protects one class of people, friends, US Citizens.  That document does not extend beyond American borders.  Necessarily implied by the fact that the United States borders other countries not under our Constitution’s jurisdiction is the promise and that our borders will be protected and secured. Otherwise, borders have no purpose and foreign actors not under constitutional jurisdiction would be free to enter and live outside of its requirements. When Republicans cooperate with Democrats to subvert the constitutional purpose of protecting the rights of US citizens, including what it even means to be a US citizen, they can only do so outside of the Constitution.  And so, if you believe as Rand Paul does, that Trump acted beyond his authority in declaring a national emergency to seal the border, then where were you and Senator Paul when Obama declared ten national emergencies dealing with pet matters of his around the world, affecting Americans in no way at all?