The Will Of The Congress Will Be Done

~Snooper~

Harry Reid stated just the other day that the will of the Congress will be done. That sounds "Rather" definitive to me and has an air of inevitability. It is also very unconstitutional. Therefore, his very statement is grounds for impeachment proceedings against him. Where in the United States Constitution does the Senate Majority Leader get his validity and his finality of this statement "Congress will work its will"? Nancy Pelosi tries to explain it all here...

"Ever since yesterday's vote, House leaders have been in frequent communication with each other and the White House to find a plan that can win strong bipartisan approval in the House. Many Members have offered ideas to modify the emergency bill narrowly defeated yesterday, and we are discussing those recommendations.

"The Senate has made a decision about how to proceed and what can pass that body. The Senate will vote tomorrow night and the Congress will work its will.

"House Democrats remain strongly committed to a comprehensive bill that stabilizes the financial markets, restores confidence, and protects taxpayers, and we hope Congress can agree on legislation in the very near future."

Incredible. She repeated Reid's statement thereby confirming that both leaders of either House will see to it that the "will of Congress" is that which will be accomplished and not necessarily the "will of We The People". This is unacceptable by any stretch of the imagination.

Now, whether or not anyone of any moral fortitude will actually call them on this blatant unconstitutional statement remains to be seen. I fully doubt it because not only are there none in either House capable of calling them on this garbage, there are none willing to step into the lion's lair. Regardless, this needs to be taken note of, does it not? It is the very epitome of that which is wholly wrong with our "Republic". If we were a "Democracy", the issue would be a non-issue. However, we were formed and based upon a Representative from of government.

Congress is charged by our very Constitution to serve The People and not Congress. They serve IN the Congress to SERVE the people, period. We don't elect them to office to have them turn around and take over nor to make friends with each other. I don't care if they have any friends "across the aisle" or on the same side of the aisle. I care about them being "friends" with their constituents of their prosepective Districts and not those of another District.

I wrote an article on this many moons ago. Initially, it was a two-part article and was eventually tailored down into one and was posted at Digital Journal. The original two-part pieces are located here and here with the merged pieces here. The Digital Journal version is located here. As a teaser;

[...] First, there is the Trustee form. This is where the elected official, theoretically, listens to the constituents and is trusted to use their best judgments to make decisions for or, in the stead of. (not a good plan)

Second, there is the Delegate representative who votes the way their constituents would want them to vote, whether or not the representative agrees with the majority of the constituents. (majority rule)

Third, there is the Politico representative which, flip-flops between the Delegate and Trustee forms of representation, depending on the issue(s). (not a good plan) [...]

Our Founding Fathers selected the DELEGATE form of Representation but through the decades of socialist indoctrination, Congress has morphed into a merged version of the TRUSTEE and POLITICO forms of Representation which is pretty much no Representation whatsoever. This morphed form rears its ugly head as revealed in such statements made by Harry Reid and confirmed by Nancy Pelosi. My essays ended thusly;

[...] This MUST be reversed before it is too late. Should a Leftinistra (a member of the socialist liberal) gain the Throne of American politics, we will be very close to another American Civil War. I make this statement because our country has not been this split since 1861. And, look what that bred. [END]

And I am serious. Take a look around you, if you are paying attention and can turn the television off, and find out for yourself. We have not been this politically split in decades, have we? I am not trying to sound like an alarmist as others have accused me of being. Was Paul Revere an alarmist or was he merely trotting around giving folks a heads up? Don;t get me wrong...I am no Paul Revere but I recognize that something is very seriously wrong when the two most powerful leaders in the House and Senate make statements as they have and no one calls them on their idiocy.

When will enough be enough? When it is too late? If so, what then my friends? What then?

The Crypt has an interesting post and interestingly enough, The Crypt is part of Politico. How ironic is that? Behold:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) says she's voting yea despite receiving 85,000 calls against it -- out of 91,000 total calls.

Is that incredulous? No matter the WILL OF THE PEOPLE, Diane Feinstein is going to ignore her constituents.

Simply amazing. The vast majority say no to the bail-out and she is going to tell them to shut up and please the vast minority.

Where do we go from here and what do we do about it people?