Twitter: @rodgermitchell; Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

Mitchell’s laws:
●Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
●The more federal budgets are cut and taxes increased, the weaker an economy becomes. .
●Liberals think the purpose of government is to protect the poor and powerless from the rich and powerful. Conservatives think the purpose of government is to protect the rich and powerful from the poor and powerless.
●The single most important problem in economics is the gap between rich and poor.
●Austerity is the government’s method for widening the gap between rich and poor.
●Until the 99% understand the need for federal deficits, the upper 1% will rule.
●To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments.
●Everything in economics devolves to motive, and the motive is the Gap between the rich and the rest..
=========================================================================================================================================================================================================================

The Constitution of the United States is the fundamental arbiter of American lawThe U.S. Supreme Court translates the words of the Constitution into the realities of American law.

Article III. Judicial branch: SECTION. 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

Congress proposes new laws. The President approves those laws unless overridden by Congress. The Supreme Court makes the final determination about whether those laws comport with the U.S. Constitution.

Thus, the three branches of our government — Legislative, Executive and Judicial — form a check and balance, that in total has comprised the law of our land, and is the basis of our strength.

People may disagree with some decisions and attempt to change them. (I personally don’t think corporations are people, nor do I think dollars are speech.)

But, those of us, who respect this nation of laws, follow those laws, while they are on the books.

Neither Congress nor the President judges cases and the Supreme Court does not propose new laws. However, the boundaries can be somewhat blurry.

Congress conducts “hearings” that very much resemble judicial trials in that there are attorneys, witness testimony, the threat of perjury, investigations, subpoenas and depositions and a finding, including contempt — and all are immune to due process laws.

The President may issue a “signing statement” that not only tells federal agencies how the President interprets a law that Congress has passed, but how that law is to be applied. This can have dramatic effects on the application of a law.

The Supreme Court, in its interpretations of the Constitution, may not only change existing law, but create entirely new law. This has been referred to as an “activist” Court. Many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights have been expanded in this way.

It is quite rare for any politician or lower court blatantly to disobey a Supreme Court ruling. Such disobedience, if successful, would set a horrifying precedent — a slippery slope — down which would slide our three-branch system of government.

The strength of the United States lies in the word “United.” Without a Supreme Court, our Constitution would be interpreted solely by regional or even local courts, ultimately disuniting the United States of America — aka “balkanization.”

We would be as Europe, subject to the same internecine strife and wars, year after year.

Considering the trauma such disobedience would cause America, it would be surprising for any informed American patriot, much less an entire political party, to suggest it.

Even the Civil War, which was based partly on bigotry, at least had an economic excuse. No thinking person wants another Civil war, for whatever the reason.

Yet here we are, the same threats and without even the economic excuse of the Civil war — this time based solely on blind hatred and bigotry: Religious hatred and sexual orientation bigotry:

The New Nullification Crisis: GOPers Vow To Defy SCOTUS Over Gay Marriage
By: Tierney Sneed, a reporter for Talking Points Memo. She previously worked for U.S. News and World Report.

Ahead of a potentially historic Supreme Court ruling, leading Republicans are vowing to defy any decision that sanctions same-sex marriage and are challenging the very legitimacy of the high court.

Opponents of same-sex marriage, including some of the major contenders for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, are darkly warning that they will not “honor” an adverse Supreme Court decision.

Some are calling for civil disobedience.

Others are moving to strip the Supreme Court of its authority to decide whether gay couples should be allowed to marry, while others have questioned whether the court has that jurisdiction in the first place.

The opposition to same-sex marriage can be summarized as: “My interpretation of my bible says that gay people should not be allowed same-sex marriage.”

There are three parts to this bigotry, that could destroy the Union:

1. “My interpretation” overrides your interpretation. There may be millions of people — even the majority of Americans — who believe as you do, but I don’t care. I am willing to sacrifice this nation to get my way.

2. “My bible” is the only religious book that matters. I really don’t care what religious books you use, or what your religious leaders say. Your religious beliefs are wrong.

3. “Gay people” are not welcome in my world. In my opinion, they are inferior, damaged and evil, and should not have the same rights I have.

Here are some of the leading proponents of the new nullification:

Rick Santorum: “We’re not bound by what nine people say in perpetuity . . . the Supreme Court doesn’t have the final word. It has its word. Its word has validity. But it’s important for Congress and the president, frankly, to push back when the Supreme Court gets it wrong.”

Santorum is among the signers of the anti-gay marriage pledge being circulated by a group associated with the website DefendMarriage.Org.

The group recently placed a full-page ad in The Washington Post with an open letter to the Supreme Court promising civil disobedience if the court struck down bans on gay marriage.

“We will not honor any decision by the Supreme Court which will force us to violate a clear biblical understanding of marriage as solely the union of one man and one woman,” the letter said.

Actually, the Supreme Court does have the final word in America. That is why we have a Supreme Court.

Santorum is a self-described “religious” Christian. So long as you follow his religion and his interpretations, you’ll be safe in America. Otherwise, not.

Isn’t that what Christ taught?

Mike Huckabee: Also signed the DefendMarriage.Org civil disobedience pledge. (As President) he would ignore a Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage.

“Presidents have understood that the Supreme Court cannot make a law, they cannot make it, the legislature has to make it, the executive branch has to sign it and enforce it. And the notion that the Supreme Court comes up with the ruling and that automatically subjects the two other branches to following it defies everything there is about the three equal branches of government.”

Er, uh excuse me Mr. Huckabee, but in fact, that is exactly what the three equal branches of our government is about. Otherwise, what would be the purpose of the Supreme Court?

Ted Cruz: “If the court tries to do this it will be rampant judicial activism. It will be lawlessness, it will be fundamentally illegitimate.”

What Cruz probably means: “My bigoted supporters don’t like it, so that makes it “fundamentally illegitimate.”

Ben Carson: “First of all, we have to understand how the Constitution works. The president is required to carry out the laws of the land, the laws of the land come from the legislative branch. So if the legislative branch creates a law or changes a law, the executive branch has a responsibly to carry it out. It doesn’t say they have the responsibility to carry out a judicial law. And that’s something we need to talk about.”

Hmmm, the neurosurgeon turned Constitutional expert now explains there are three different kinds of laws, legislative, executive and judicial. It will be interesting to hear which of our laws is which.

Sadly, we can’t have laws against bigotry and stupidity, so even fool MDs can say what they wish.

Steve King:has also introduced legislation the Supreme Court from considering the question of same-sex marriage. “We could pass this bill before the Supreme Court could even hear the oral arguments. That would stop it right then, there would be no decision coming out of the Supreme Court. This is a brake, and whether we can get the brake on or not between now and June, that we don’t know.”

Bigotry always is stupid, and King long has epitomized that stupidity. The notion that Congress could pass a law to prevent the Supreme Court from considering a law, would in of itself be unconstitutional. As my grandchildren would say, “Well, duh . . .”

Tom DeLay: “A ruling by the Supreme Court is nothing but an opinion if the legislative branch and the executive branch do not enforce it. Not only that, if the states would just invoke the 10th Amendment and assert their sovereignty, they can defy a ruling by the Supreme Court. It’s in the Constitution. We can tell the court what cases they can hear.”

To make this Union, the states voluntarily surrendered their sovereignty to a sovereign national government.

Aside from being stupid, bigotry is scary. DeLay not only doesn’t want to enforce what the Supreme Court decides (thereby nullifying the purpose of the Supreme Court), but he doesn’t understand what the word “Supreme” means.

The states cannot “defy” the Supreme Court (or, for instance, we could have a return to slavery. Uh oh. Maybe that’s the wrong example for DeLay of Texas.)

Texas State Rep. Cecil Bell: “The reality is that when the Supreme Court sets precedents, states don’t always adhere to them. I am not predicting what Texas will do — but to assume that Texas will suddenly change how it does business is presumptuous.”

Gee, Mr. Bell, exactly which Supreme Court decision do you plan “not to adhere to”? Sorry, but I don’t plan to visit you in prison.

Alabama State Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore:

“When federal courts start changing our Constitution by defining words that are not even there, like marriage, they’re going to do the same thing with family in the future. When a word’s not in the Constitution, clearly the powers of the Supreme Court do not allow them to redefine words and seize power.”

To the crazed, bigoted mind, it must mean the Supreme Court can’t make decisions about words not in the Constitution, like for instance: “Marriage.”

Presumably, the Supreme Court also can’t make decisions involving such words as “Internet,” “automobile, “airplane,” “telephone,” “gay,” “bisexual,” “lesbian,” “atomic,” “Catholic,” “Protestant” “African American” “solar power” and . . . oh, you get the idea.

I patiently await the sane, tolerant, patriotic voices of the Republican Party. Are you people out there?

Hello?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

==========================================================================================================================================================================
The Ten Steps to Prosperity:

1. Eliminate FICA (Click here)
2. Federally funded free Medicare — parts A, B & D plus long term nursing care — for everyone (Click here)
3. Provide an Economic Bonus to every man, woman and child in America, and/or every state a per capita Economic Bonus. (Click here) Or institute a reverse income tax.
4. Federally funded, free education (including post-grad) for everyone. Click here
5. Salary for attending school (Click here)
6. Eliminate corporate taxes (Click here)
7. Increase the standard income tax deduction annually. (Refer to this.)
8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher, progressive tax rates on all their forms of income. (Click here)
9. Federal ownership of all banks (Click here and here)
10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99% (Click here)

Initiating The Ten Steps sequentially will add dollars to the economy, stimulate the economy, and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.-

10 Steps to Economic Misery: (Click here:)
1. Maintain or increase the FICA tax..
2. Spread the myth Social Security, Medicare and the U.S. government are insolvent.
3. Cut federal employment in the military, post office, other federal agencies.
4. Broaden the income tax base so more lower income people will pay.
5. Cut financial assistance to the states.
6. Spread the myth federal taxes pay for federal spending.
7. Allow banks to trade for their own accounts; save them when their investments go sour.
8. Never prosecute any banker for criminal activity.
9. Nominate arch conservatives to the Supreme Court.
10. Reduce the federal deficit and debt

As the federal deficit growth lines drop, we approach recession, which will be cured only when the growth lines rise. Increasing federal deficit growth (aka “stimulus”) is necessary for long-term economic growth.

#MONETARYSOVEREIGNTY