Trump's Actions Necessary, not Unconstitutional

Trump’s Actions Necessary, not Unconstitutional
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
June 22, 2025

In basketball parlance, President Donald Trump offered Israel an “assist,” over the weekend, in helping to avoid a greater conflagration versus the Islamic Republic of Iran, or spreading beyond the Middle East. The assist appears to be successful in that Iran’s nuclear enrichment sites have been, according to Trump, “completely and totally obliterated,” and the operation a “spectacular military success,” he said.

In retaining the element of surprise, the precision targeted strikes by the United States on Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz - all just northwest of central Iran, met with no resistance. These are key sites where Iran had been in the advanced stages of uranium enrichment and had the ballistic missiles with which to strike. Even the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) reported Iran’s “engaging in clandestine nuclear activity.” 

“Iran must not have a nuclear weapon,” Trump has repeated for more than 20 years. “Now is the time for peace,” he said following the success of Operation Midnight Hammer, which included the participation of 125 US aircraft in what should be a one and done. These American fighter pilots are to be applauded the world over. On this night, Israel and the United States together saved humanity, and that is not hyperbole. Anyone not seeing the importance and urgency in the actions of Israel and the United States over the last two weeks has absolutely no moral compass. 

However, the issue here is the constitutionality of Operation Midnight Hammer. Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution says that “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States….” Due to the foresight of the Founding Fathers, who installed a series of checks and balances amongst the three branches of the federal government, Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 grants to Congress the power “To declare War.…” 

Just to complicate matters, on November 7, 1973, overriding the veto of President Richard M. Nixon, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, a.k.a. The War Powers Act. The purpose of the WPR is to limit the authority of the president to send US military overseas or into foreign wars without Congressional approval. The War Powers Resolution is actually not Constitutional - the Legislative Branch is curtailing the Executive Branch from exercising its Constitutional duties as Commander in Chief. There is but one Commander in Chief, not 435, and as such, that individual has the responsibility to make decisions about troop movements, et al, at a moment’s notice. He doesn’t have time to consult with 435 people who may or may not even have the appropriate clearance. And let’s not forget the possibility of a House member opposing the Commander in Chief’s decisions and leaks them to the media in an effort to thwart such plans, which could be considered treason.

The quagmire in Vietnam, still having just under two more years of active combat, was not a declared war. Of course tell that to the more than 58,220 Americans who lost their lives fighting in that non-war. During the Korean Conflict, also an undeclared war, 36,574 Americans lost their lives. The fact of the matter is, that the United States has not declared war since June 4, 1942 when it did so against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania, who sided with the Axis Powers during World War II.

Every president since 1942, beginning with Harry Truman, when he sent the first “advisors” to Vietnam in 1950, has made unilateral decisions to send troops into harm’s way. Every president from Dwight D. Eisenhower through Gerald Ford continued digging the United States deeper and deeper in Vietnam, where if not for the French and NATO, the US might not have ever set foot.

President Jimmy Carter had the dubious distinction of overseeing the arming and training of Islamist insurgents in Afghanistan fighting against the Soviet Union. This led to the rise of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, who would ultimately be the villains in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Islamonaziterrorists brought down the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, crashed a plane into the Pentagon in Arlington, VA, and crashed another plane into a field in Shanksville, PA. Were it not for the brave passengers on that flight, that charged the cockpit, that plane had a target of hitting either the White House or the Capitol building. All told, on that horrific day 2,977 innocent men, women, and children lost their lives on American soil, the gravest assault on American territory since the December 7, 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbor.

Under President Ronald Reagan the invasion of Grenada in 1983 was justified for protecting American citizens overseas. President George Herbert Walker Bush’s reasoning for the 1989 Panama invasion concerned drug trafficking. During President Bill Clinton’s terms he cited international obligations to justify sending American troops to Bosnia and Somalia.

President George W. Bush received special dispensation regarding the sending of troops overseas because of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The nation came together, as did the Congress, which worked in a bipartisan manner to give Bush a wide berth with Operation Enduring Freedom. Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) giving Bush that latitude. Perhaps too wide, as American involvement in Afghanistan ran from 2001-21 when Joe Biden bungled the evacuation of Americans from that country that saw 13 American servicemen murdered on his watch.

Airstrikes on Libya in 2011 under Barack Obama were necessary to protect civilians - Libyan civilians. During Trump’s first term, heavy counterterrorism operations against ISIS, al-Qaeda, in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan took place, again largely under the auspices of AUMF. While Biden occupied the White House, and also mostly under AUMF, military operations occurred in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.

Hardly any effort has been made to reel in the presidents via the War Powers Resolution. Now, with the US assisting Israel in their efforts to rid Iran of any possibility of achieving nuclear weaponry, all of the sudden Trump violated the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution. Why? Because it’s Trump and because it’s Israel.

Trump has not violated the Constitution as he is working to protect Americans at home and abroad - there’s no telling how many sleeper cells are in the United States thanks to the open borders policy under Biden. And there are tens of thousands of American nationals in the Middle East at any given time - both military and civilians. Trump has not called for regime change in Iran (although they sure could use it - its own citizens seem to want that). Iran is responsible for the deaths of well over 1,000 Americans in recent years - that gives Trump cause to be vigilant and cautious against Iran. 

Most importantly, Trump has not declared war against Iran - not that he could, legally. Iran has made war against the United States, certainly since the 1979 Iranian Revolution that witnessed the capture of 66 Americans on November 4, 1979, 52 of whom remained hostages in Iran for 444 days, released, not uncoincidentally, on January 20, 1981 - the very day President Reagan took the oath of office.

Opposition coming from the right like Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon who don’t seem to comprehend America First does not mean America Only. Trump’s decision to assist Israel, from the air, not with boots on the ground, is beneficial to Israel, the United States, and all civilized peoples.

“Today it’s Tel Aviv. Tomorrow it’s New York. Look, I understand ‘America First.’ I don’t understand ‘America Dead.’ That’s what these people want,” said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, about Trump’s MAGA critics.

US Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), who never met a decision he supports favoring Israel, simply said, “this isn’t Constitutional.” He’s wrong and he’s an antisemite.

In her traditional ignorance and grandstanding, US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said, “the President’s disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers.” As a member of Congress she ought to know that under the parameters of the WPR, Trump is required to notify Congress within 48 hours of initial military action, and deployment can only be up to 90 days, sans a Congressional declaration of war. AOC, vapid, Marxist, antisemite that she is, would rather see Iran with nukes that could destroy Israel, than recognize that Trump, along with Netanyahu and their respective militaries and intelligence have saved the world.

“They were notified after the planes were safely out. But we complied with the notification requirements of the War Powers Act,” said Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

US Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) naively said “the Israeli Foreign Minister admitted yesterday that Israeli bombing had set the Iranian nuclear program back ‘at least two or three years.’ So what made Trump recklessly decide to rush and bomb today? Horrible judgment.” What proof does Kaine have? Even if true, is it acceptable that Iran can continue their goals of building nuclear bombs? Does Kaine not understand what “death to America” and “death to Israel” actually mean? Very shortsighted.

No Senator, it is not acceptable if Iran has nuclear capabilities in two years, three years, or 200 years. President Trump took bold, decisive, measured actions. None of his predecessors had the intestinal fortitude to do so. How do we know Trump’s actions were measured? Because Trump posted on his Truth Social “We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there. We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don’t want missiles shot at civilians or American soldiers.”

Operation Midnight Hammer seems to be a tremendous success. Success for the people of Israel, the people of the Middle East, the people of the United States, and the people of the civilized world - including the citizenry of Iran who hope and pray for their genuine freedom from the Tyrant of Tehran.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

The Constitution as Toilet Paper

The Constitution as Toilet Paper
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
April 20, 2020

The advent of the Coronavirus has only heightened the awareness of the crime of indoctrination of our young people in the classroom. I’m not just angry, I am frightened; and anybody who loves freedom and liberty had damn well better be angry and frightened as well.

Children, kindergarten through college, are no longer mandated to recite the Pledge of Allegiance; are no longer mandated to study American history; are no longer mandated to learn the vital documents that made the United States the greatest nation on earth - the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. For every American shunning those documents and subjects, and they are the first to stand up and condemn this nation, there are millions trying to get here any way they can.

Make no mistake, I do not approve of those who arrive here illegally seeking government-supported lives and livings. In fact, I have long supported, and now more than ever, the deportation of illegal aliens. Now more than ever? Yes, absolutely, as more than 20 million Americans are out of work - because the government ordered this shutdown. Yet, why is the same government attempting to allow more guest workers to steal even more jobs away from Americans, most of whom are one paycheck away from being completely broke?

Congress, if it would grow a backbone and spine, could put the billions upon billions of dollars given to illegals in the form of welfare, food stamps, medical care, scholarships, and other so-called benefits, in the hands of those bona fide American citizens entitled to that money - more now than ever before. Every illegal in this country is a law breaker with no entitlement to anything other than a return trip to their country of origin. Congress would be upholding the Constitution - part of its oath of office. Any member - Democrat or Republican violating their oath should be removed from office and barred from seeking elected office again.

The indoctrination teaches American students to support open borders, citizenship and voting rights for illegals, government run healthcare, the notion that the United States is guilty of just about all that is wrong in the world, and that it should be ashamed of its past - a past not properly taught. These are the same people clamoring for free college tuition and that the government should absorb their college debt - in other words, passing personal responsibility to others - namely those who never set foot on a college campus, who, by the way, far outnumber those who have. They have been taught that asking voters for identification is racist; that there is racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, and any other -ism and -phobia one can conjure up to maintain a level of victimhood. Makes sense why so many of that generation could easily support Senator Bernie Sanders (S-VT), and why so few from older generations fell for his socialist nonsense. For more on how asking for identification is not the least bit racist, https://sanfordspeaksout.blogspot.com/2020/04/as-voter-id-goes-so-goes-election.html

One of my favorite quotes, from former President Ronald Reagan, is most apropos here. “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

My oldest daughter, soon to be a college graduate, actually said she supports total equality above liberty. Those words sent a shiver down my spine. Aside from being a veritable impossibility, to want to limit one’s own liberty in favor of an idea that couldn’t even qualify for the pages of Thomas More’s Utopia, is so frightening and dangerous. This is certainly not something learned at home. To willingly surrender one’s liberty, is but one step away from slavery. Slavery to a system that will determine your life’s course, take your destination away from you, and take your choices away from you.

She and her fellow travelers of progressive liberal socialists are always shouting about keeping the government out of their bedrooms and uteruses - the abortion on demand crowd. Yet they are the same people to oppose any other kind of choice in people’s lives. They oppose school choice and charter schools, mostly because of the indoctrination pushed by the teachers’ unions. In the current pandemic, they are perfectly amenable to the shuttering of churches and synagogues calling them non-essential, yet cheer because abortion clinics remain open, labeled essential.

The United States Constitution does not become null and void simply because of a crisis. In fact, a crisis is exactly why and when the Constitution is at its most important and necessary. Yet, far too many governors, mayors, attorneys general, and even police chiefs, are treating the Constitution as de facto toilet paper. Some are calling their executive orders an “overreach.” I call it totalitarianism.

Governors Andy Beshear (KY), Andrew Cuomo (NY), Jay Inslee (WA), Phil Murphy (NJ), Gavin Newsom (CA), Ralph Northam (VA), Jared Polis (CO), Gina Raimondo (RI), Gretchen Whitmer (MI), and Tom Wolf (PA) - not coincidentally all Democrats, in one way or another have unilaterally imposed measures in their states that are not only unconstitutional, but make little to no sense. People’s right to worship, assemble, and even their free speech has been commandeered. People are also being punished simply for offering a dissenting opinion.

During this past Holy Week for Christians, Beshear ordered police to cite and fine churchgoers - not for entering the churches, but for remaining in their cars for a service on Easter.

A protest at the statehouse in Raleigh, North Carolina was broken up by police telling the peaceful assemblage that protests are deemed non-essential, and not permitted. Again, another thwarting of Constitutional rights.

In Brighton, Colorado, police handcuffed and put in a squad car, Matt Mooney, 33, himself a former police officer, for the unimaginable crime of playing catch at a local field with his wife and six year old daughter. Mooney noted that while he was being cited for alleged health code violations, none of the three officers involved wore gloves or masks. Being outdoors is encouraged by doctors, and most activities can be accomplished while observing social distancing.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti (D) have instructed residents to call police to report anyone not practicing social distancing or any other health code violation. These are most definitely Gestapo tactics, and I do not use that word lightly or as hyperbole.

In New Jersey, 15 Orthodox Jews were cited for attending the funeral of one of their rabbis in the heavily Orthodox Lakewood community. Even those who remained in their cars were asked for their drivers’ licenses. Seven Orthodox rabbis from Lakewood have died from the Coronavirus. When asked about his ability to nullify the First Amendment, Governor Murphy said that “is above my pay grade.” If Murphy can’t keep his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, he should not hold the office.

Another New Jersey case has Kim Pagan from Toms River facing up to a $1,000 fine and up to six months in jail for organizing a protest at the statehouse in Trenton. They could put a woman in jail for exercising her First Amendment right of assembly and free speech in protesting the government. At the same time, convicted sex offenders and child molesters are among the growing list of felons being released prematurely because they may have diabetes and are at risk of contracting the Coronavirus or actually already have the disease. So, while these animals are roaming freely among decent society, an honest citizen could be imprisoned for exercising her Constitutional rights.

My younger daughter, also a collegian, agreed with the authorities in New Jersey, regarding Pagan, calling it a matter of life and death. Again, another young person willing to surrender some liberty. I don’t know where I went wrong with my daughters.

But the winner of the most Draconian elected official award can only be Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. Her dictatorial edicts include banning the purchase of seeds. Seeds. Yes, those things you put into the ground with hopes of growing a vegetable garden. A vegetable garden that could produce produce - yeah, I did that -for people who then won’t need to buy it at the supermarket after countless others have touched it. Weed - essential in Michigan; seeds non-essential in Michigan. But tobacco shops and the like are ordered closed. Furniture, carpeting, flooring, paint, and  gardening equipment are off limits - in stores of greater than 50,000 square feet, where other items are available for purchase. Even in vehicles, people are barred from religious services on church or synagogue property. As if banning public worship isn’t bad enough, Whitmer has fishing and hunting on her list of non-essentials. Fishing and hunting are typically done either alone or in very small groups who can easily separate themselves by more than six feet. Adding to the confusion, kayaking, canoeing, and sailing are permitted, however, motor boating and jet skiing are out. She also banned traveling to one’s second home in the state. And while attending a church or synagogue is off limits, abortion clinics are considered essential, as Whitmer said, “abortions are life-sustaining,” in what has to be one of the most tragic oxymorons ever spoken.

What is also terribly disturbing is how the liberal media, obsequious weasels that they are, are applauding these measures, criticizing people for exercising their rights, and not actually examining and parsing whether or not there is overreach by these elected officials. One of the whiners on The View, Joy Behar, said that anyone carrying a firearm at a protest is a domestic terrorist. These are the same media people supporting the closing of gun shops as non-essential. If ever a firearm is essential, it is now, more than ever. The Second Amendment is in the Bill of Rights for the people’s right to protect themselves against a tyrannical government.

Another frightening example of overreach and censorship comes from Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg. Opinions supporting protests and information pertaining to actual protests themselves are being removed from his site as Zuckerberg is calling such postings “misinformation.” Any comment I might make on Facebook supporting or applauding a protest or providing the public with, say, dates and times of such gatherings will be removed, because of one person. Yet the reprehensible things people post about President Trump and Vice President Pence, remain intact on Facebook. Feeding into the demonization of protesters exercising their First Amendment right, on MSNBC some dolt referred to the protesters as “Fox News Nazis.” This column will be linked on Facebook, to be sure.

There is a dangerous loss of liberty being perpetrated by myriad elected officials, and if they are not stopped now, and they get reelected, their regimes will become even more repressive. After all, their reelections demonstrate an approval and acceptance of their behavior and decisions by lemmings willing to surrender to the unexplained, unchecked, and uncontested will of the very few. Why are people willing to surrender their civil liberties so cavalierly? Perhaps if they lived in Cuba, North Korea, the former Soviet Union, or Venezuela for even a short period, they would understand this is a most important time to defend their civil liberties, not abandon them.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Keeping His Enemies Closer

Keeping His Enemies Closer

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

September 17, 2017

Frustrated by Congressional Republicans inability to coalesce and actually accomplish the goals they set forth during the 2016 campaign, President Donald Trump has been dining with Democrats in the White House. He has become the Don Corleone of the presidency - keeping his friends close and his enemies closer - especially pertaining to the issue of DACA.

Make no mistake, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) are enemies of President Trump as they speak of him with nothing less than venomous verbiage. Regarding Trump’s decision to end DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), Schumer said, “was heartless and brainless.” Pelosi chimed in calling Trump’s decision “a despicable act of political cowardice.”

Even I am conflicted - somewhat - concerning DACA. Long a supporter of deporting all illegal aliens, knowing how improbable a task that would be to undertake, I stand on the principles of law and order - that those in the United States illegally have broken the law, and lawbreakers should not be rewarded for their illegal acts. Yet, for generations now, illegal aliens continue to garner access to healthcare, welfare, food stamps, public education, free and reduced meals in public schools, in-state tuition at many state colleges and universities - all at the expense to the American taxpayer.

Here’s the conflicting aspect of DACA - the overwhelming majority of the roughly 800,000 “dreamers” in this unconstitutional program were brought to the United States at ages too young to understand, and beyond their control. Many of them are living positive lives having procured education and employment making them otherwise trouble-free and contributing members of society. Yet, they are still living in this country illegally, due to the illegal actions of their parents, relatives, or whomever transported them across international lines into the United States.

Many of the DACA residents know only life in the United States, speak only English, have broken no laws (save for being here illegally), and are simply seeking to remain in the only country they know. Make no mistake, I have not softened my stance on illegal immigration - those here illegally should have absolutely no access to the aforementioned rights bestowed upon citizens and legal residents. By stripping those so-called entitlements away from those here illegally, many may self-deport, while others simply will go deeper underground finding their lives even more difficult and complicated in these United States. If that sounds harsh, so be it - these people were neither invited to the United States, nor do they have a right to be here, illegally. This is still about the rule of law - American law.

Parents of DACA participants should have applied for entrance legally, waited in line as millions before them, such as my own mother-in-law, who took such pride in becoming an American citizen and casting her first vote for president - I know, I witnessed her swearing in ceremony as well as took her to the polling station on Election Day. There is a right way and a wrong way to conduct business, and those who choose the wrong path should not be rewarded. This also includes denying amnesty to those within DACA.

In spite of standing fervently with my principles, reality dictates there is a more than fair chance the dreamers will be legalized by Congress. President Trump took the proper course of action putting DACA in the laps of Congress. Trump understands what clearly Barack Obama did not - the executive branch does not make law, that is the job of Congress - the legislative branch. Even Obama’s own lawyer advised him that DACA, unilaterally enacted with no legal authority to shield these lawbreakers from deportation, would fail if argued in court. Simple concept - Constitution 101 - Article I, Section 8 - “The Congress shall have Power... To establish an [sic] uniform Rule of Naturalization.”

Unfortunately, in the hands of Congress, the right thing cannot be counted upon to be accomplished. The Democrats want the dreamers granted citizenship and voting rights in the blink of an eye - that is wholly unacceptable. The Republicans lack the intestinal fortitude to demand the following - if legalization is a fait accomplis, it should never include citizenship or the right to vote - the price to pay for illegal immigration. Any violation of the laws of the land are subject to deportation. No chain migration whatsoever - the DACA residents are young adults now and should be able to provide for themselves. Their parents or whoever brought them to the United States must be deported, move to the back of the line to qualify for legal immigration with concomitant penalties and fines.

The GOP must demand that any move toward legalization of the dreamers need first include funding for the wall on the southern border of the United States, and increased national security. Secure the funding first - no carrot and stick shtick that sunk the amnesty of 1986 because there were a plethora of carrots, but nary a stick. Additionally, and this need be new legislation pertaining to anyone entering the United States for any purpose - student visas, vacationers, business people, new immigrants - legal residents and new citizens - all must be photographed and fingerprinted. This information should be stored on a national database accessible in all 50 states.

As much of a small government American that I am, it should still be able to keep track of anyone in this country who are neither citizens nor permanent residents. While the overwhelming majority of the so-called mainstream media will react apoplectically, Congress must not kow-tow to this group of unelected, partisan hacks who, more often than not, are attempting to inject themselves into their own stories instead of reporting the news in an unbiased fashion. Do your job Congress - do what is best for American citizens.

Every effort must be made to keep DACA participants from acquiring citizenship and voting rights, thus encouraging more and more illegal behavior from people who have no right to be in the United States. This country cannot house the entire populace of Earth, and people who are granted admittance, must follow the laws if they wish to become part of American society.

Signs carried by protesters demanding equal rights for immigrants are disingenuous. Legal immigrants already have equal rights. Illegal immigrants have no right to anything other than a one way ticket back to their countries of origin. Illegals burning American flags clearly have no allegiance to the country they supposedly wish to join so badly they snuck in. Be American. Take pride in your new country - carry the American flag, not the flag of another nation. Help make America great again.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Illegal Still Means Breaking the Law

Illegal Still Means Breaking the Law

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

December 10, 2014

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, here we go again, regarding this most divisive issue of illegal immigration. What part of illegal do people not understand?

Within a three day span, from December 7-9, one column and several letters to the editor of such myopic shortsightedness appeared in The Indianapolis Star it has become painfully obvious people do not understand the concept of the rule of law.

One does not need a law degree to understand that when a person who is not legally entitled to take up residency in the United States of America crosses the border without permission, that person has committed a crime – period. Whether such people are called illegal immigrants, undocumented aliens, illegal aliens, what they cannot be called is American.

It is completely disingenuous to read Matthew Tully’s December 7 column “Immigration has made Indy a more vibrant city,” for the reader could assume the text will be about those upstanding folks who legally became residents and citizens of Indianapolis. But we all know what happens when one assumes.

Legal immigration, yes; illegal immigration, no way Jose. Why are lawbreakers rewarded, when those still standing in line to do the right thing are falling farther and farther behind?

Tully quoted Terri Morris Downs, head of the nonprofit Immigrant Welcome Center, as saying, “Let’s pretend there’s an imaginary line… Would you as a parent be willing to cross that line to make sure your kids were being fed and that your family was being cared for? Would you break that law and cross that line, that imaginary line, to make sure your kids would be safe and have a chance at a decent life? I think most people would.”

While Downs naturally is tugging at the heartstrings to make her point, she forgets that borders are not imaginary lines. Granted they are lines that may not be terribly visible, but geo-political lines are legitimately organized. Then, she admits the crossing of that line is an illegal act – “would you break that law…”

Tully then correctly observes that the “current immigration system is a politically charged mess…,” but fails to note this is because of the unwillingness to differentiate between legal and illegal, as well as both major political parties using this broken system to its own advantage.  Liberals and Democrats support amnesty and a path to citizenship in an effort to induce support of Hispanic voters, yet not realizing that Hispanics are not a monolithic community. Republicans and conservatives turn a blind eye to this crisis because they seek support of businesses who hire illegals for cheap labor.

As for amnesty itself, one Indy Star letter writer, Robert W. Hammerle of Indianapolis, opined that “illegal immigrants deserve amnesty.” No, they don’t – they have broken the law. Not only do they not deserve amnesty, they do not deserve any of the trappings that come with actual citizenship or even legal residency. Hammerle went so far as to compare today’s illegals with the “Southern rebels and their leaders like Gen. Robert E. Lee and James Longstreet [who] were given amnesty by the U.S. government. Even though they tried to destroy the U.S. Constitution while killing hundreds of thousands of fellow American citizens, they were forgiven and allowed to move on with their lives.”

Not so fast, Mr. Hammerle. Certain amnesties were offered but with stipulations attached, and those amnesties were presented in stages.

“The Confiscation Act of 1862 authorized the president of the United States to pardon anyone involved in the rebellion. The Amnesty Proclamation of December 8, 1863, offered pardons to those who had not held a Confederate civil office, had not mistreated Union prisoners, and would sign an oath of allegiance.

On May 29, 1865, President Andrew Johnson provided for amnesty and the return of property to those who would take an oath of allegiance. However, former Confederate government officials, officers with the rank of colonel and above from the Confederate army or lieutenant and above from the Confederate navy, and people owning more than $20,000 worth of property had to apply for individual pardons.

On Christmas Day 1868, Johnson granted an unconditional pardon to all Civil War participants except high-ranking military and civil officials.”

Finally, “in May 1872 the Congressional Amnesty Act gave the right to hold office again to almost all Southern leaders who had been excluded from public office by the 14th Amendment.” (http://www.wtv-zone.com/civilwar/amnesty.html)

But Section 3 of the 14^th Amendment did take seriously the acts committed by the rebel confederates. “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as a executive or judicial office of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or give aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House remove such disability.”

Clearly the behavior of the southerners was looked upon with a dim view by the federal government of the Union and amnesty was not awarded lightly or with a cavalier attitude – requiring an oath of allegiance – something not expected of the illegal aliens in the US today. In fact illegals in this country are not legally required to learn or speak English, let alone take any kind of oath of allegiance. And quite frankly, Mr. Hammerle, two wrongs do not a right make.

It is this paucity of expectations that remands this issue back to Tully’s column where he suggests bringing the illegals out of the shadows will move them to become “more civically engaged.” Being civically engaged starts with being law-abiding, something that has eluded the illegals from their first step on to American soil. Tully also recommends treating illegals not “as unwanted outsiders,” but with compassion. That begs the question: Would a rational person have compassion for someone breaking into their home? Should that miscreant be given food stamps, medical attention, public schooling for the children, and in-state tuition rates at the local state school at the cost to the homeowner? No, because breaking the law is still breaking the law.

Even Barack Obama should understand the above concept, yet he announced an executive order to protect nearly five million illegal aliens from potential deportation. As a result of that misguided and illegal decision, 14 states, including Indiana have enjoined in a lawsuit against the federal government fighting the Obama edict.

Geoffrey Heeren, the director of the Immigration Clinic with Valparaiso University Law School checked in on December 9 with his Indy Star letter noting the state of Indiana was wrong to participate in this lawsuit. Heeren said the suit was “misguided” to suggest Obama “usurped Congress’ power to write immigration law.” That is exactly what Obama did and it is wrong, as writing legislation is in fact the job of the Congress, as per the US Constitution.

Heeren suggested that Obama has not violated his constitutional duty as chief executive to enforce the laws pertaining to immigration simply because the amount of money provided by Congress has been exhausted. Obama has a responsibility to enforce the laws passed by Congress and enacted by the president. If the there is a dearth of funding, he must prioritize, which Heeren claims Obama is doing by not deporting certain illegals, yet he is still complicit in violating the law by allowing for an extension of their illegal acts simply by allowing them to remain in the United States.

Such funding priorities must commence at the borders – both southern and northern – stop people from crossing into the United States illegally before they become a fiscal and legal problem. This should be a nondiscriminatory policy instead of the one unofficially adopted by so-called lawmakers and Obama to allow for “more sympathetic” groups – families, people who heretofore have committed no crimes until invading the United States, and those seeking honest work instead of the thugs, drug dealers, killers, rapists, and other miscreants whose presence in this country would have a deleterious effect on society. The easy answer is, to use a Western-themed movie concept, to “head them off at the pass.”

But Heeren also seems to miss the point when he supports Obama’s executive order calling the beneficiaries “law-abiding,” when the first act they committed in this country was to break the law simply by crossing the border.

And it would seem to run contrary to the United States Constitution for Obama to make law and to attempt to supersede the 10^th Amendment. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Nowhere does it say such rights can be obfuscated and absconded with by Obama or any other occupant of the White House.

Those who are in the United States illegally are still breaking the law and they continue to have an adverse effect on the economy, as well as on the potential prosperity in their own lives living under the radar or in the shadows. The United States is a proud nation of immigrants – legal immigrants. It is important to discern legal from illegal, act in a less emotional tenor, and save this nation from itself before there is no nation left to save.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Obama Plans One Branch Government

“I can take steps without legislation… that’s what I’m going to do.” – Barack Obama, State of the Union, January 28, 2014

Obama Plans One Branch Government

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
January 31, 2014

The full content of the above Barack Obama State of the Union quote is no less revealing or demonstrative of his desire and design to not only disregard Congress, but subvert the Constitution as the law of the land. From King George III to Barack Hussein Obama I, the United States of America is about to come full circle as the rule of law is abandoned.

“America does not stand still, and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do,” said Obama during Tuesday night’s speech before both houses of Congress.

Make no mistake, this is  nothing new from Obama. This has long been his modus operandi. The only difference is that he announced it to the entire world that it is his intention to bypass Congress and sign into law legislation he crafts if Congress won’t do it for him. To this public revelation, Obama received a standing ovation from the Democrats in the House Chamber. The GOP membership was not surprisingly silent.

It matters not how well intentioned Obama is with his desire to help American families, although such a claim is highly dubious knowing his track record. Obama can put forth all the legislative proposals he wishes, but it is still the job, as per the United States Constitution, of the Congress to pass or reject such legislation. It’s a system of checks and balances and it has been in place since 1789.

But apparently King Barack I knows better than the Founding Fathers and has been given a green light by the flaccid Congressional membership of his own party. The GOP had better wake up make sure they fight every Executive Order Obama signs. The Republican majority had better not squander their position or they will lose it come this November. In Obama’s case, the pen indeed is mightier than the sword.

“A Republic, if you can keep it,” is the second part and answer of an oft-quoted quip made by Benjamin Franklin at the close of the 1787 Constitutional Convention.

Yet, the question, asked by Dr. James McHenry, a Maryland delegate to the convention, is just as important. “Well, Doctor, what have we got – a Republic or a Monarchy?” queried McHenry.

That question need be asked again, but by the millions of Americans who wish to retain our Republic. In fact, the question really needn’t be asked, but it’s the sentiment that must be demanded by the American people before it is too late.

President Ronald Reagan said “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. It has to be fought for and defended by each generation,” on July 6, 1987 at the Annual Convention of Kiwanis International.

Reagan knew, as millions of freedom loving Americans know, that freedom, like any good relationship, requires cultivation and deep roots if it is to survive. We the people must fight to retain our freedom, for if we lose that fight, the last best hope for peace and freedom around the world – the United States of America, will succumb as well.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

Don't Stand with Rand!

Don’t Stand with Rand!

Commentary by Sanford D. Horn

March 19, 2013

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has proven himself a hypocrite by not supporting the rule of law or the Constitution in his support of granting citizenship to the 12 million-plus illegals who have invaded our borders.

A hypocrite, as I lauded Paul for his Mr. Smith Goes to Washington-style filibuster condemning the Obama administration’s use of drones to kill American citizens on American soil.

Other so-called GOP leaders to stand with Rand include, but sadly are not limited to: Gov. Chris Christie (NJ), Sen. Marco Rubio (FL), and Cong. Paul Ryan (WI). These Republicans are not leaders but capitulators willing to sell their souls to save the party and their own cushy-tushy jobs. And worse yet, all four are early leading contenders for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination.

The Paul support for citizenship varies somewhat from Rubio’s support for citizenship in some of the details, but let’s not get mired in the muck. Bottom line, granting 12 million illegals citizenship will never stem the tide of illegals swarming our borders, but instead encourage even more to invade the United States.

The plan by which Rubio has signed on as part of the Gang of Eight calls for increased border security and a strengthened E-Verify system for employers to confirm potential hires bona fides. Paul’s plan actually eliminates the E-Verify system as a part of his Libertarian belief system, making it an even weaker plan. Paul’s plan does include shoring up border security, but calls his plan “trust but verify,” which may have worked for President Ronald Reagan with the Russians, but hasn’t a snowball’s chance in Guam of working with illegals.

In fact, the Supreme Court will decide an Arizona voter law this spring that tightens the requirement for potential voters by having to prove American citizenship versus simply signing a form saying they are citizens.

Arizona Attorney General Thomas Horne referred to the current system as “essentially an honor system. It does not do the job.”

“People who want to vote illegally may think nothing of committing perjury by declaring themselves citizens on a piece of paper.” (“Justices Dubious of Arizona Voter Law,” USA Today, 03/19/13)

Regardless of how one slices it, de facto amnesty or official amnesty, 12 million invaders rewarded for illegal behavior is a slap in the face to those future Americans who have “stood in line” and followed the law to become legal residents and citizens the proper and legal way.

Sen. Paul said he believes his plan will be embraced by conservatives and his TEA Party followers and that only with conservatives on board could such a plan succeed. Paul is wrong to think that true conservatives – Constitutional conservatives – would ever support such a plan.

Short of deporting illegals, which even I recognize would be tremendously challenging, the only way to shrink those numbers is via self-deportation. The problem with self-deportation is that neither the Democrats nor the Republicans want to actually do their jobs and make this happen for fear of alienating voters and again, losing their cushy-tushy jobs.

Self-deportation can occur when federal and state governments shut off the spigot of “free stuff” for illegals – seats in public schools, medical care, food stamps, welfare, and drivers’ licenses. The flip side of government is the public sector – employers – who should be fined for every illegal they hire, the equivalent of a minimum wage salary for a year. The illegal worker should also be fined and deported.

For the GOP and RNC chief Reince Priebus to suggest that supporting a path to citizenship for 12 million illegals will move the party in the right direction is terribly disingenuous. If anything, it declares that the party of Lincoln, Coolidge, Eisenhower, and Reagan is on its knees begging for Democrat scraps at the voting polls.

It also runs counter to the $10 million Priebus announced the RNC will spend to conduct community outreach amongst blacks and Hispanics. Hispanic-American citizens should be insulted by the notion that 12 million illegals, a majority of whom are Hispanic, will be rewarded for their illegal behavior, when so many others became citizens by following the law.

Blacks, many of whom are at the lower end of the income ledger, should not applaud the legalization of the 12 million as competition for jobs will become even more challenging in an already fledgling economy.

If the GOP is to make inroads in the black and Hispanic communities, it needs to appeal to the conservative sides of those populations. Not that they are any more monolithic than any other community, but many blacks and Hispanics are pro-life, church attending folks who prefer that less money be sent overseas to countries that don’t like the United States and that illegals not be allowed to steal potential jobs form their constituencies.

Until Congress – from both sides of the aisle – is willing to do their job – create disincentives for illegals – even at the risk of losing their precious seats; and until employers are willing to put greed on the back burner, illegal immigration and invasion of our borders will remain a paramount issue.

We the people need to demand politicians not support amnesty or a path to citizenship for illegals and demand they seal the borders or they will find themselves unemployed come next Election Day. It’s our country. Let’s stop surrendering it before there is nothing left to surrender.

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.