Letter to Chicago Tribune: Separation of church and state

Chicago Thursday PM April 29, 2010

Voice of the People, Chicago Tribune

Gentlepeople:

The Tuesday, April 27 Voice of the People letter (“Church and state”) remarks on school vouchers that “this would be a support of religion that goes against the separation of church and state.”

Neither the word 'church' nor 'separation' appears anywhere in the United States Constitution.

The phrase 'wall of separation between Church and State' first appears in a January 1 1802 letter from then president Thomas Jefferson to leaders of the Danbury CT Baptist association, allaying their fears of the new Federal Government interfering with their religious practices.

This is the same Thomas Jefferson who wrote our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, which includes in its first two paragraphs the terms 'nature's God' and 'their Creator', and 'Divine Providence' in its concluding paragraph.

Arnold H Nelson




Note to New York City Tea Party

Chicago Saturday AM 20 April 2010

New York City Tea Party

Gntlepeople

After reading Karl Rove's Thursday, April 1 WSJ OpEd (“Where the Tea Partiers Should Go From Here”) I sent this forwarded letter to WSJ. It did not get printed ( I did have one printed... in 1996) but I included a brainstorm I had for the Tea Partiers, and thot you might be interested.

Arnold H Nelson (On the Democrat-occupied west bank of Lake Michigan (IL 9th CD. repped by Nancy Pelosi's evil twin, Jan Schakowsky))

PS I certainly do not think there's a need for Tea Party competition for Michelle Bachman, Tom Coburn, or Jim DeMent.

PPS I wrote a Contract for America 2010, and actually hand delivered it to Newt Gingrich when he was book signing here in Chicago in October 2009 . I never heard from him, but I think it was a helluva lot better than anything that could come from his recent American Solutions opinion survey. My Contract is 1900 words long, but I have not seen anything like its first three 'grafs anywhere. It's included in an email I sent to the Speaker on August 22, 2009, on my blog:

fosterbeachchicago.blogspot.com [Also on my Facebook]

From: Arnold Nelson

Subject: What next for Tea Partiers...

To: "WSJ Letters"

Chicago Thursday PM 1 April 2010

Editors, the Wall Street Journal

Gentlepeople:

The Wall Street Journal of Thursday, April 1 has an article “Where the Tea Partiers Should Go From Here” where Karl Rove Describes their present status as well as anyone can, then presents an excellent proposal of what they should do next to return the country to its senses.

The Tea Partiers are unique as a political force in that: 1) they appear to be leaderless, but 2) few movements in US history can match them for comon objectives and determination. These attributes are what define them and make them strong.

As a next step there is one thing they can pledge to themselves which could have a major influence in achieving those objectives: their number one goal should be running a recognized Tea Partier in every Repiblican primary y election in the country in 2010. We don't need a third party – we have a perfectly good major party just waiting to be taken over by people with Tea Party principles.

As of April 1, Illinois and Texas are beyond help, but that leaves 33 senate seats and 384 House Reps available.

This would give the Tea Partiers a national voice of considerable heft, and solve the perennial Republican RINO problem – wishy-washy Republicans who too often may as well be Democrats. Tea Partiers need not call themselves Conservatives, but will sure be able to define a new force on the national scene: Real Republicans.

Arnold H Nelson

National Review Magazine: Last Michigan Wolverine?

Chicago Saturday PM 17 April 2010

Editors, National Review Magazine

Gentlepeople:

A National Review 'The Week' item of 19 April 2010 says Michigan's

“...last wild wolverine was found dead in the woods this month.”

If you found this item in the Saturday, April 11 Lansing [Michigan

Capitol] State Journal, you had a very reliable source. But you must

have stopped reading before the last sentence: “The animal was the first

wolverine ever authenticated in Michigan.”

So why are the University of Michigan's teams called 'Wolverines'?

Maybe 'Buckeyes' was already taken?

Arnold H Nelson (50+ year NR subscriber?)

Thomas Frank Wall Street Journal:Employee Free Choice Act

Chicago PM 15 April 2010

Editors, The Wall Street Journal

Gentlepeople:

The Wall Street Journal's Thomas Frank writes in his Wednesday, April 14 column “Conservatives and the Market for Alienation” that “Most Democrats... When it comes to union priorities like the Employee Free Choice Act ,,, have trouble remembering why it's a good idea.”

Hey Tom, have you given any thot to the possibility that most Democrats finally realize that EFCA is good only for union brass and their thug enforcers and does absolutely nothing for the rank and file union member except take away their secret ballot?

Arnold H Nelson

Letter to Decatur[IL] Herald and Review" ...

...about their Congresscreature, Phil Hare:

Chicago Monday AM 5 April 2010

Editors, Decatur Herald and Review

Gentlepeople:

The Decatur Herald and Review article “Video of Hare remark on Constitution goes viral on Internet” of Saturday, April 3 quotes 17th District US Congressman Phil Hare saying at a Quincy senior center Thursday, April 1: “I don't worry about the Constitution on this, to be honest."

Article VI of the United States Constitution says “Senators and Representatives... shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution....”

As to the Constitutionality of the recent health care legislation, of the 7541 words of the US Constitution (including all 27 amendments,) not one of them is 'health” or 'insurance'? (The word 'care' does occur once, in the phrase “[The President] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully execute....”)

Congressman Hare may not have read Article VI, but he must certainly know about the “General Welfare clause.” Congressman Hare could expand his knowledge of Constitutional Law even further by reading Federalist Paper Number 41 where the father of the Constitution himself, James Madison explains that “a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms [general welfare] immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon.” And sure enough, following that semicolon is a list of 17 specific things Congress is limited to doing, and not a sign of anything to do with health, insurance, or care.

The Commerce cause is sometimes proposed to get around the mean old Constitution, but if Congress can interpret "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes" to mean Congress can do whatever it wants, why have a Constitution?

Obamacare is often compared favorably with Medicare and Social Security. This is a good comparison only in that Obamacare is no more unconstitutional than each of those entitlements. The question our leaders should be considering is how many times can you ignore a Constitution before it is meaningless?

Arnold H Nelson

Letter to NYTimes about MA islands Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket...

Chicago Saturday AM 3 April 2010

Editors, The New York Times

Gentlepeople:

The New York Times of Saturday, April 3, Chicago edition has an article "A Race to Reap Energy From the Ocean Breezes" accompanied by a map showing the Massachusetts offshore islands of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. Unfortunately, the captions are reversed: Nantucket is the one 25 miles at sea, while Martha's Vineyard, on the other hand, is an easy predawn, head-clearing swim from the mainland for a healthy, if somewhat inebriated United States Senator.

Arnold H Nelson

Letter to WSJ on Tea Party

Chicago Thursday PM 1 April 2010

Editors, the Wall Street Journal

Gentlepeople:

The Wall Street Journal of Thursday, April 1 has an article “Where the Tea Partiers Should Go From Here” where Karl Rove Describes their present status as well as anyone can, then presents an excellent proposal of what they should do next to return the country to its senses.

The Tea Partiers are unique as a political force in that: 1) they appear to be leaderless, but 2) few movements in US history can match them for comon objectives and determination. These attributes are what define them and make them strong.

As a next step there is one thing they can pledge to themselves which could have a major influence in achieving those objectives: their number one goal should be running a recognized Tea Partier in every Repiblican primary y election in the country in 2010. We don't need a third party – we have a perfectly good major party just waiting to be taken over by people with Tea Party principles.

As of April 1, Illinois and Texas are beyond help, but that leaves 33 senate seats and 384 House Reps available.

This would give the Tea Partiers a national voice of considerable heft, and solve the perennial Republican RINO problem – wishy-washy Republicans who too often may as well be Democrats. Tea Partiers need not call themselves Conservatives, but will sure be able to define a new force on the national scene: Real Republicans.

Arnold H Nelson