One of the most devastating indictments of the manner in which political "science" courses are taught in our colleges and universities today is the muck of contradictions that passes for the notion of a "political spectrum."

A "spectrum," according to Webster's, is defined as "a continuous range or entire extent." Observe that this definition does not designate the identity of the phenomenon, but only the manner in which it makes its nature manifest: a varying characteristic that forms a sequence of intermediate values between two opposing extremes.

Without those two opposing extremes the concept of a "spectrum" collapses into insensibility: one would never speak, for instance, of a rainbow with two red edges, or of a thermometer with a boiling point at each end.

"In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." - Thomas Jefferson


As I detailed in part one of this article, the next president will inherit more than a financial catastrophe when he assumes office. He will also inherit a shadow government - an authoritarian regime that is fully staffed by unelected officials, fully operational, and ready to take over the running of the country at a moment's notice.

This is all part of the government's Continuity of Government (COG) plan, which was laid out in two May 2007 directives issued by President Bush. These directives, which do not need congressional approval, provide that the president (or his appointees) will take control of the government in the event of a "national emergency" - loosely defined to mean "any incident" that disrupts governmental functions or "severely affects the U.S. population." This could mean anything from a terrorist attack to a hurricane. Particularly significant is the absence of a plan to repopulate or reconvene Congress or the Supreme Court, which would give unchecked executive, legislative and judicial power to the executive branch.

As we are all now aware, the $700-billion bailout has become the law of the land. A lot of people are, understandably, upset about this and are pointing out the flaws of this legislation: that it is, ultimately, unfunded; that it rewards failure and penalizes success; and that it represents an increase in government's control over the economy unseen since the Great Depression.

All valid arguments, of course - and totally irrelevant: Such critiques miss the crucial point completely.

Mount Weather "All men having power ought to be mistrusted." - James Madison

America's next president will inherit more than a financial catastrophe when he assumes office. He will also inherit a shadow government - one that is fully staffed by unelected officials, fully operational, and ready to take over the running of the country at a moment's notice.

Every four years about this time, news stories start to appear about the Electoral College, the constitutionally established system we use to elect the president of the United States. Invariably, pundits use this season to lambast and ignore the important role the Electoral College plays in preserving our republic. Recently the attacks have gotten worse, and they have even convinced four states (Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, and Hawaii) to enact legislation to do away with the Electoral College. Nationally, U.S Senator Bill Nelson (D-Florida) has introduced legislation to abolish it.

But before we discard the Electoral College, we need to understand its importance. As President Lyndon Johnson said of the Electoral College, "Our present system of computing and awarding electoral votes by states is an essential counterpart of our federal system and the provisions of our Constitution, which recognize and maintain our nation as a union of states."

Last week, I discussed the manner in which the federal government of the United States has taken over our economy, manipulated our money and credit, and turned our once-free nation into a second-class "welfare" state headed towards authoritarian dictatorship - and how our two major-party political candidates, McCain and Obama, are powerless to stop this advance due to the fact that they helped create it.

Are you mad as hell? You need to be; any citizen left in this country who doesn't have the soul of a slave ought to be screaming bloody murder.

Ayn Rand For decades, writers such as Friedrich Hayek , Ludwig von Mises , and Ayn Rand have been warning us that the mixed-economy "welfare" state is not a third alternative between capitalism and collectivism but is, instead, an explosive and unstable mixture that must, by the logic of the principles involved, become one or the other.

Reader issue #702 "In America, the law is King. For as in absolute governments, the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." - Thomas Paine

 

As usual, the contenders for the White House are making a lot of promises about what they will change if elected. They're singing the siren song all politicians adopt by telling us exactly what we want to hear: reduce taxes, lower gas prices, reform Social Security, and provide us with more and more benefits. In other words, they're going to give us something for our vote - maybe. But reading between the lines, it's what Barack Obama and John McCain aren't saying that should cause voters to pause.

Much of the recent revival of interest in the Constitution centers around the Bill of Rights and the war on terror, a subject I discuss elsewhere in this book. I could not be more sympathetic to these concerns. However, Americans must remember that the Constitution was designed not merely to prevent the federal government from violating the rights that later appeared in the Bill of Rights. It was also intended to limit the federal government's overall scope. Article I, Section 8, lists the powers of Congress. Common law held such lists of powers to be exhaustive.

It could be argued that the single most important act of the founders was to provide a sound monetary policy. Money must reflect real value. When a nation's money has no value, and it becomes fiat money, the people lose power; those who control the money control the government and, eventually, all of the country's institutions, including the media.

Pages