Kansas Governor Brownback booed at March Madness game.

During yesterday's game between Wichita State University and Kansas University game the TV coverage would almost make ya think there were no WSU fans in attendance because of their infatuation with showing KU fans during the first half.

The fan coverage became more equal the 2nd half after WSU began dominating. On a time out, the cameras located Kansas governor Sam Brownback sitting in the stands. And they booed him.

Some say it's because he was wearing a politically-correct t-shirt with both a WSU Shocker and a KU Jayhawk on it. In other words, rooting both the teams representing the state he governs.

Others were quick to point out the booing was due to Brownback's education spending cuts. Of course, Liberals hate him for a variety of reasons - and let's face it KU and the community in which it resides Lawrence, Kansas, is a big liberal population and school - Brownback's well-known stance against abortion and gay marriage, his conservative fiscal policies and his most recent spending cuts in education.

In fact, a caller into the morning drive time radio show I listen to said Brownback was booed because he is "destroying education in Kansas. She also had all the "class and decorum" to call him "clueless" he was being booed because he smiled thru it and called his wife the same because she supposedly was lip read to be saying, "Why are they booing us?"

Well, I take issue with those perspectives.

Firstly, liberals can't stand the man because he is a principled man. He takes a stand on the issues. Like Rush Limbaugh says, being a liberal allows you to weasel out of risking having a potentially-disagreeable position on anything. Why? Because liberals never stand against anything.

Want unlimited abortions? You got it. Want to marry someone of your same sex? Do whatever makes YOU happy. You want a handout? You got it. Need higher and higher taxes to fund an evermore bloated, broken, ineffective and unproductive system? You bet!

Well, maybe it's the booing liberals in the crowd who are the clueless ones. Why? Because they insist on embodying the definition of insanity that says keep on repeating the same thing expecting eventually a different response.

Secondly, it is the embodiment of clueless to insist on implementing economic and social models that have been utterly dismal failures in history (hello? Socialized medicine? War on Poverty?) all the while insisting because we are so smart (arrogant?) that we can somehow make them work this time.

And, lastly, to bring it down to the crux of this particular issue - education - maybe some of these emotional boo birds ought to take a breath and think that instead of blindly throwing good money after bad, maybe - just maybe - Brownback is showing some courage and actually trying to take some steps to fix a completely broken system. One that continues to have a high dropout rate, lower and lower test scores and an evermore less-than-ready-for-the-job-market product.

So, instead of booing someone trying to stop the ship from sinking, perhaps they ought to cheer someone with the stones to actually take some substantive steps to trying to right the ship and get it back on its true course.

Constitutional checks and balances - apparently a thing of the past.

Constitutional scholars like radio talk show host Mark Levin – and yes, he is quite the Constitutional scholar in his own right – have been saying that thanks to the governmental abuses of power brought about in the “hope and change” of the Obama presidency we now live in post-Constitutional republic.  “Post” as in “no more,” “no longer,” “gone,” “history.”

The American Heritage® New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition defines “checks and balances” as “A fundamental principle of American government, guaranteed by the Constitution, whereby each branch of the government (executive, judicial, and legislative ) has some measure of influence over the other branches and may choose to block procedures of the other branches. Checks and balances prevent any one branch from accumulating too much power and encourage cooperation between branches as well as comprehensive debate on controversial policy issues. For example, to enact a federal law, the Senate and the House of Representatives must each vote to pass the law. In this sense, each house of Congress can check the other. Furthermore, even if the two houses do agree, the president must sign the law. If he chooses to veto the law, it can still be enacted if two-thirds of the members of both houses vote to override the veto. Under this arrangement, both Congress and the president can check each other. (See also appropriation, impeachment, judicial review, and separation of powers….)

Furthermore, “The Constitution was devised with an ingenious and intricate built-in system of checks and balances to guard the people's liberty against combinations of government power [emphasis added].”*

So… how has this Constitutional system of “checks and balances” has been working this second decade of the 21^st Century?

Let’s quickly do a recount: the American public did not want Obamacare (nor did they get to vote on it). Yet the Obama Administration and a corrupt Democratic-controlled congress led by the Marxist scum that is Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid rammed it down our throats. Worse yet, the US Supreme Court – not just liberal activist justices like that relic Ruth Bader Ginzberg and activist Marxist justice Sonya Sotomayor but also the spineless turncoat Chief Justice John Roberts – decided to legislate from the bench and call Obamacare a “tax” and therefore called it Constitutional regardless of the public’s wishes.

The majority of voters in California passed Prop 187 which denied public benefits to illegal aliens. Never mind the whole basis of our democracy is “majority rule” – it’s been the rule of law in the polling places, state and federal legislative bodies and even in the Supreme Court itself! But, activist federal district court judge Matthew Byrne promptly declared it unconstitutional neutering the will of the people, their elected legislature and their majority rule.

Sadly, the abuse doesn’t end there - far from it.

Polls show that 85% of American citizens oppose amnesty for illegal aliens.** Even the Democrat-controlled congress that was on its way out the following January dared grant amnesty to illegals. Yet President Obama didn’t let that stand in his way. Last fall he announced he would execute policy directives to cabinet agencies that defers and halts deportations of illegals and gives chances for better jobs to approximately 5 million undocumented – that means “illegal” – aliens.***

And what does Congress do about it? Nothing while the Democrats rode out there terms. Tragically the new Republican-controlled Congress hasn’t done much of a damned thing about it either but blow hot air.

Now let’s talk gay marriage. The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was enacted into federal law in 1996 allowing states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriage licenses granted in other jurisdictions. DOMA and other laws had barred same-sex marriages in the eyes of federal law – at least in terms of legal recognition as “spouses” for sake of benefits and legal property transfer, etc. “DOMA's Section 3 defined marriage for the purposes of federal law as a union of one man and one woman.” Prior to 2004, same-sex marriages – aka gay marriage – were not performed anywhere in the U.S…. It was challenged in the federal courts. Beginning in 2010,” activist federal judges legislating from the bench in “eight federal courts found DOMA Section 3 unconstitutional. “**** The following states have laws banning gay marriage: Alaska, California, Florida, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Nebraska, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, D.C. and Washington state – just to mention a few – and many of those have survived challenges to their state supreme courts.*****

But, oh the will of the people, their legislature and the law be damned when it comes to activist judges who want to legislate from the bench. Beginning in 2004, such radicals in black robes decided they disagree with such laws and began ruling them “unconstitutional” and hence rendering them neutered.

So, what the hell can ya do?

It's obvious that we no longer have a true "checks and balances" system in our government anymore. The congress is a mere puppet for a rogue president and a corrupt judiciary, and the POTUS has assumed the role of sole monarch and Constitution be damned as he all but runs it through the shredder. 

We are so screwed. Exactly as the founding fathers feared.

* The National Center for Constitutional Studies (Unknown date) Retrieved 5 March, 2015 from http://www.nccs.net/checks-balances-limited-and-balanced-government.php

**Munro, N. (5 March, 2015) Here’s how much taxpayer money illegals will receive via Obama’s amnesty, posted on The Daily Caller. Retrieved 5 March, 2015 from http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/05/obama-amnesty-to-grant-1-7-billion-in-taxpayer-cash-to-illegals/

*** Bloomburg News (20 Nov., 2014) Obama provides amnesty for 5 million illegal immigrants, posted on Newsmax. Retrieved 5 March, 2015 from http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Obama-amnesty-immigrants-illegal/2014/11/20/id/608735/.

****Wikipedia (5 March, 2015) Same-sex marriage in the United States. Retrieved 5 March, 2015 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States

Signs appropriate to our times....

“It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they have been fooled.”
– Mark Twain