The Litmus Test(s)

©2010 drkate

Forget the argument about ‘seniority’ and the perks brought to your state by a Senator or Congressional representative: we now know that’s a ruse to keep the gig going.  And that is NOT what representation is about.   “Club Fed”, led by the celebrity clown in chief, has had a game going on for thirty years where this ‘threat’ is used to quash any opposition.  Pledges of not using ‘litmus tests’ are part of the game.

Well then, game on.  Its time to call your bluff.

Litmus Test. A test in which a single factor (as an attitude, event, or fact) is decisive.

The silver lining in all of this assault on America is that we now know who these politicians are (h/t Papoose), the kinds of questions to ask that expose their anti-American viewpoint, and the focus of the questions to ask.

I submit that we have learned the focus of all of our questions now is the constitution…and it will be this way for the next twenty years to assure we have rid ourselves of the anti-Americans and their sentiment permanently, and that our children are being educated in the arts of  constitutional governance, which include a great deal of personal responsibility.

The Constitutional Litmus Tests

The oath of office for public servants notwithstanding, nearly all of our Congressman and Senators are either ignorant of or deliberately in defiance of the Constitution for the United States.  The usual question about what the oath of office means to the office holder is critical.  Remember how Nancy Pelosi responded to a reporter’s question regarding the constitutionality of any health care legislation.

The Constitutionalist Test

Part One

Otherwise known as  a national security provision of the U.S. Constitution , what is the  representative’s definition of ‘natural born citizen’  as contained in Article II, Section I, Clause 5?  Any response other than ” born in the U.S. of two citizen parents, 14 years residency, and 35 years of age” is unacceptable.  If they pass that hurdle, what are their plans to investigate Mr. Obama?

In my view, this is the seminal constitutional question right now, and cuts through all the others by not allowing any answer to be ‘lip service’.

How many will dare to ask, or answer that question?  And if they avoid the question, why?   Keep pressing.

Part Two

This covers how well they have read their job description, specifically Article I of the Constitution, Sections 8 and 9.  Section 8 lists the enumerated powers, and Section 9 the powers forbidden to congress.

Here you can have a hey! day…if they know the powers and can recite them, ask them why they have abrogated their powers to the Executive Branch.  Ask them to justify their votes for all of the bills based on those enumerated powers.  Specifically what aspect of the Commerce Clause, for example, allows the takeover of the auto, finance, and health industries?  And how does the representative justify these actions within the context Article IV, Clause 4, which guarantees to each state a republican form of government?

Finally, just for fun, why don’t you ask them what their position is on whether the 16th Amendment was legally ratified? 😛

The Politicians v Statesmen Test

These are questions that are sure to stump even the most talented of deceivers…essentially they will show themselves, writing their own script for their future.

For those who have refused to align themselves with the people, and the people’s directives contained within the Constitution, this will be an excruciating part of their interview.  The following statements about the difference between a politician and statesman can be worked into specific questions testing and illuminating the the extent to which the Constitution guides a representative’s actions.

  1. Statesman loves the Constitution.
  2. A Politician hates the Constitution.
  3. A Statesman enforces the Constitution.
  4. A Politician violates the Constitution.
  5. A Statesman uses truth to keep power in the hands of the people.
  6. A Politician uses lies to gain power over the people.
  7. A Statesman‘s primary concern is to secure freedom for future generations.
  8. A Politician’s primary concern is to get elected or re-elected.

and six more:

  1. Statesman will not play politics with the people’s money.
  2. A Politician will buy votes with tax money.
  3. A Statesman knows the people must control government.
  4. A Politician believes that government should control people.
  5. A Statesman knows the people must limit government’s power to tax.
  6. A Politician believes government should have unlimited power to tax.
  7. A Statesman gives his allegiance to the people and country.
  8. A Politician gives his allegiance to government.
  9. A Statesman will demand a balanced budget.
  10. A Politician will spend money stolen from future generations(deficit spending).
  11. A Statesman will cause peace.
  12. A Politician will cause wars.

What part of the Constitution does the new Arizona law violate?  Note that the politician’s only response is that it is ‘racist’.  What part of the word ‘illegal’ do they not understand?  And, why have they allowed the Executive to not enforce existing law?

How do you feel about the federal government’s lawsuit against Arizona, Senator/Congressman?  And how will you protect this state against federal encroachment or other similar lawsuits against initiatives of its citizens?


Who created the Constitution?

Recalling how the definition of the word ‘federal’ has changed over a span of 100 years, it would be interesting to know what definition, if any, a purported representative understands this term to mean.  Does the representative believe in a small, limited government, or a supreme national government?  And what is the proof of this viewpoint?

The Primaries Approaching

Time to create that checklist of questions, and to choose carefully.  Remember, part of the silver lining in the assault on our senses is our growth in awareness…knowing also there is no time to avoid and evade key questions.

12 Responses to “The Litmus Test(s)”

  1. 1 Quantum Leap July 31, 2010 at 2:27 pm

    They want to get rid of the constitution.

  2. 2 Quantum Leap July 31, 2010 at 2:28 pm

    What to do about Illegal aliens?
    Check this.

    • 5 drkate July 31, 2010 at 3:27 pm

      Thank you! This is stunning.

      Its time for the revolution

    • 6 Renee July 31, 2010 at 3:58 pm

      This is in fact stunning Kate, and correct. I have posted another story of the same info also.This seems to be very concrete information and is a breath of fresh air in all of the madness. How could a judge not research this DrKate ? Amazing no ?

  3. 7 no-nonsense-nancy July 31, 2010 at 4:44 pm

    I have to defend attorney Bolton. How was she to know? After all, she didn’t learn anything about the constitutin in law school!

    Bring on the revolution. STOP THEM COLD!!

  4. 8 Debbie July 31, 2010 at 6:17 pm

    Here is a link to all 5 parts of Newt’s speech…It’s pretty good, and thought I would share it…You don’t have to post it if you don’t want… 🙂

    Newt Gingrich: Impeach judges – Crush and Replace the Left – 2012 “Victory or Death!”

    • 10 tdr August 1, 2010 at 1:23 pm


      what most bloggers were posting from the foia documents was that there are two dates posted for the marraige of SAD to Lolo. Interesting that in both marraiges, there are diveorce papers but no marraige certificates. Is it reasonable to assume that both children were conceived out of wedlock but both common law “marraiges” ended in an official divorce?

      • 11 Debbie August 1, 2010 at 3:59 pm

        tdr…I wouldn’t doubt it…SAD seemed to be quite the seedy gal…And if she got married somewhere other then the USA, who knows what is required for documents..But I happen to think, there’s a lot of info. that’s delibertly being hidden for GOD only knows why…It’s just ALL a LIE!

        • 12 tdr August 2, 2010 at 6:54 am

          i must reverse my comment. documents released for lolo in response to a foia request include a marraige certificate. i cannot make out the date but from within the rest of the documents it appears to have occured on the 15th.

          included on pg 92/97

          pg 93/97 includes divorce decree from first “marraige”

          still more amazing from this account is a very personal insight into the political climate of indonesia at that time. lolo is requesting an extension of his visa to the us. his rational for why he should be granted this extension mainly deals with the political climate in indonesia at that time. see pg 78. he was not granted the extension and sad and bho followed him to indonesia. volumes can be written on this as he describes the typical communist seizure of land and belongings and yet he is married to what most people believe was a communist simpathizer in sad.

Comments are currently closed.

July 2010
« Jun   Aug »

Recent Comments

Get Your Copy at

All Pets Haven

Blog Archives

Just follow copyright law and nobody gets hurt!

The contents of this blog are protected under U.S. Copyright Law, United States Code, Title 17. Requests for use of active and archived articles in this blog must be presented in writing in the comment section, and proper attribution is expected. Thank you in advance.

drkatesview thanks you!

Since 8/15/09


Listen to drkate’s Revolution Radio

RSS Big Government

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS American Thinker

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS American Spectator

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Button 1 120 by 90

%d bloggers like this: