"Lawfully Speaking" Vol I, Issue No. 4
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. and John M. Huff

Recently we received a lengthy article arguing that the human race would not be around much longer, and so we should try to minimize our disruptions of the environment as much as possible. As a matter of fact, the writer suggested if we were really considerate of the earth we should voluntarily implement "population control" measures.

The term "population control" encompasses so many concepts, from simple education about birth control options, to euthanasia and other more grisly practices. My reply to the gentleman was essentially as follows:

"Lawfully Speaking" Vol I, Issue No. 3A
Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. and John M. Huff

Last week we discussed the substantial differences between a republic and a democracy as forms of government, emphasizing the unique aspects of our American Constitutional Republic. By properly defining the word "democracy" we are now prepared to examine a broader topic: the deliberate alteration of meanings of words to achieve political or social ends. The extreme version of this practice was referred to as "Newspeak," describing the practices of propaganda in a totalitarian State in George Orwell's uncomfortably prophetic book 1984.

"Lawfully Speaking"
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. and John M. Huff

Last week marked the beginning of this internet column, and the introduction of many of our readers to the word "lawful" in the context of a Constitutionally-limited Republic. This week we will briefly discuss the significance of the word "republic" used to describe the American form of government, and how it differs from a democracy in several important respects.First let’s distinguish between a "republic" as a form of government, and the current "Republican" Party. We will briefly examine how the two major political parties evolved. In 1787 when the Constitution was drafted the word "republican" referred to those people who espoused the republican form of government. Despite the warnings of George Washington in his Farewell Address that political parties "render alien to each other those, who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection," parties began taking shape during the next administration, under John Adams. At that time the term "Federalist" was applied to a party representing a group who favored a strong central government. On the other side of the aisle, the words "republican" and "democrat" were used interchangeably to describe the "Anti-Federalists," who were proponents of a small federal government. The Anti-Federalists maintained that most governmental powers should be reserved to the States and to the People. By the time Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801, the Anti-Federalist party was called the "Democratic-Republican Party." When Andrew Jackson won the election of 1828, the party name was shortened to simply "Democrat." By the 1850’s, however, the issues of slavery and "homesteading" laws - especially concerning fees being charged by the federal government for land in the western territories - were causing another division within the party. Out of this division came candidates who promoted the abolition of slavery and an end to homesteading fees. Their solution to these problems, especially in the case of slavery, was for the federal government to get involved. This marked the birth of the modern Republican Party starting with a convention in 1854. In 1860 the Republican Party held it’s second national convention, and nominated Abraham Lincoln for President.

"Lawfully Speaking" Vol. III, Issue No. 3
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. Huff

War Prayers, War Powers, War Profits, War Banking, War Money, War Mongering

Perhaps all that needs to be said about praying a nation into war was said by Mark Twain in his short narrative entitled “The War Prayer.” If you haven't been chilled by it I invite you to take a few minutes right now and use it to prepare yourself for the other realizations alluded to in my title.

Our consideration of so-called emergency powers or war powers should begin and end with a thorough knowledge of the Constitution. It is sheer idiocy to pretend that the President or anyone else could possess a lawful power that magically appears as needed for every real or pretended emergency – a power for which he must never be called into question!? Does he take a modified Oath to the Constitution that goes something like “...to Protect and Defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic... 'unless something comes up.'” ???

"Lawfully Speaking" Vol I, Issue No. 1
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. and John M. Huff

Announcing a new source for commentary about political and legal issues with a fresh perspective, published periodically on the LEXREX website and by email newsletter. The purpose of this column will be to fill a growing void in popular news reporting, especially concerning political issues, of what we will call the lawful position. The reader may be asking, "What does the word ‘lawful’ mean, and why not use the word ‘legal’ instead?" These questions will be answered in our columns, but we’ll provide a simple introduction to the word "lawful" as follows.