Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 200

Thread: The Constitution: The God That Failed (To Liberate Us From Big Government)

  1. #1

    The Constitution: The God That Failed (To Liberate Us From Big Government)

    The Constitution: The God That Failed (To Liberate Us From Big Government) by Bill Buppert



    Publisher’s Note: I thought it more appropriate to conduct my annual savaging of the Constitution on the day after in concert with the Scottish bid for independence. May they look elsewhere for a document to wreath around a successful bid if they win.

    Constitution Day is the annual homage to one of the most devilishly clever instruments to make a slave people think they are free. The political coup occurred a mere three years after the divorce proceedings from the United Kingdom in 1783 where 13 separate nations sat across from the King’s legation in Paris. Ironic the day following is a referendum for the Scottish to no longer be English poodles and break away from the same clods in London. Such a referendum would never be tolerated in the land of the free and home of the brave under current Constitutional constraints since the question of individual sovereignty at the individual and state level was solved by Lincoln’s clarification on Constitutional totalitarianism in 1865 and further cemented in the years to follow.

    A quick thought experiment is in order. If the Second Amendment has any meaning, how does one explain the Constitutional imprimatur and stamp of approval on the 1934 NFA, 1939 US v. Miller, 1968 GCA, 1986 FOPA, 1989 Bush prohibition on the importation of cosmetically offensive weapons and the very existence of the BATFE? All government approved and enforced; move along citizen, no infringement here.

    The answer is elegantly simple: limited government is impossible and the rulers do as they please using the document that destroyed the state’s individual presumptions and nationalized the edict and issue of executive regulation to the atomistic level. The Federalist project was a means to effectively manage tax cattle and when possible invade the rest of the planet with the contagion the document created to put every human being under its power on a permanent plantation.

    One additional observation: is it not instructive that in every case where an individual seeks redress against government abuse, they never use the body of the Constitution but the anemic Bill of Rights the Federalists objected to? Read Hamilton’s weak arguments against the Bill of Rights in Federalist #84 for a clue where these scoundrels were headed.

    Constitution Day is not a day of celebration but a day of mourning for what could have been. –BB



    “By rendering the labor of one, the property of the other, they cherish pride, luxury, and vanity on one side; on the other, vice and servility, or hatred and revolt.”

    ~ James Madison

    “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain — that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.”

    ~ Lysander Spooner

    Today, 17 September 2014, is Constitution Day. There will be paeans, abundant commentary and church-like observances of the glories of this document in making us the most blessed nation on planet earth. This essay suggests a contrarian thesis. The Constitution is an enabling document for big government. Much like the Wizard of Oz, the man behind the curtain is a fraud. In this case, for all the sanctimonious hand-wringing and the obsequious idolatry of the parchment, it sealed the fate of our liberties and freedoms and has operated for more than 200 years as a cover for massive expansion of the tools and infrastructure of statist expansion and oppression. Among the many intellectual travels I have undertaken, this is one of the most heart-breaking I have ventured on. I want to acknowledge the compass-bearers who sent me on this journey: Kenneth W. Royce (aka Boston T. Party) and his seminal book, The Hologram of Liberty and Kevin Gutzman’s Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution. For most of the political spectrum in America, the document represents their interpretation of how to make this mortal coil paradise. Even in libertarian circles, it is taken as an article of faith the Constitution is a brilliant mechanism to enlarge liberty and keep government at bay. That is a lie.

    The document was drafted in the summer of 1787 behind closed doors in tremendous secrecy because if word leaked out of the actual contents and intent, the revolution that had just concluded would have been set ablaze again. They were in a race against time and did everything in their power to ensure that the adoption took place as quickly as possible to avoid reflection and contemplation in the public square that would kill the proposal once the consequences of its agenda became apparent. They were insisting that the states ratify first and then propose amendments later. It was a political coup d’état. It was nothing less than an oligarchical coup to ensure that the moneyed interests, banksters and aristocrats could cement their positions and mimic the United Kingdom from which they had been recently divorced.


    The original charter of the drafters was to pen improvements to the existing Articles of Confederation. Instead, they chose to hijack the process and create a document which enslaved the nation. Federalist in the old parlance meant states rights and subsidiarity but the three authors of the fabled Federalist Papers supported everything but that. Their intent and commitment was to create a National government with the ability to make war on its constituent parts if these states failed to submit themselves to the central government.

    As Austrian economists have discovered, bigger is not necessarily better. The brilliant and oft-dismissed Articles of Confederation (AoC) and Perpetual Union are a testament to voluntarism and cooperation through persuasion that the Constitution disposed of with its adoption. Penned in 1776 and ratified in 1781, the spirit and context of the Articles live on in the Swiss canton system and are everywhere evident in the marketplace where confederationist sentiments are practiced daily. The confederation’s design divines its mechanism from what an unfettered market does every day: voluntary cooperation, spontaneous information signals and the parts always being smarter than the sum A. confederation according to the Webster’s 1828 dictionary is:

    The act of confederating; a league; a compact for mutual support; alliance; particularly of princes, nations or states.
    I would advise the readership to use the 1828 Webster’s dictionary to accompany any primary source research you may undertake to understand American (& British) letters in the eighteenth century. It is the source for the contemporary lexicon. It is even available online now.

    Note that the precept of individual taxation was an end-run against state sovereignty from the very beginning. If the Congress does not wish to violate state sovereignty, then they will simply prey on the individuals in the states. It should be obvious that the AoC was not a recipe for government employees from top to bottom to use the office to enrich themselves so a scheme was afoot to precipitate and manufacture dissent over the present configuration of the central government apparatus which for all intents and purposes barely existed. The AoC was intolerable to a narrow panoply of interests and the Federalist Papers appeared between October 1787 and August 1788 to plead the case for a newer form of “Republic” authored by three individuals: James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton. The British had sued for peace in 1783 and the AoC were still in effect until 1790. Time was ticking to erect the new government apparatus that would strengthen the central government to eventually mimic the very tyranny which caused British North America to put the English Crown in the hazard. The Anti-Federalists rose up in response and provided what I consider one of the most splendid and eloquent defenses of small government penned in our history.

    When the Constitutional Convention convened on 1787, 55 delegates came but 14 later quit as the Convention eventually abused its mandate and scrapped the AoC instead of revising it. The notes and proceedings of the cloistered meeting were to be secret as long as 53 years later when Madison’s edited notes were published in 1840.

    The Anti-Federalist Brutus avers in Essay I in October 1787:

    “But what is meant is, that the legislature of the United States are vested with the great and uncontroulable powers, of laying and collecting taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; of regulating trade, raising and supporting armies, organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, instituting courts, and other general powers. And are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the state governments, and reduce this country to one single government. And if they may do it, it is pretty certain they will; for it will be found that the power retained by individual states, small as it is, will be a clog upon the wheels of the government of the United States; the latter therefore will be naturally inclined to remove it out of the way. Besides, it is a truth confirmed by the unerring experience of ages, that every man, and every body of men, invested with power, are ever disposed to increase it, and to acquire a superiority over every thing that stands in their way.”

    The conflict was brewing between the Jeffersonians among the individualists and the Hamiltonian collectivists. The rhetorical lines were drawn and the fate of the nation eventually slid into the camp of the Nationalists.

    George Washington wrote to John Jay on 1 August 1786:

    “Many are of opinion that Congress have too frequently made use of the suppliant humble tone of requisition, in applications to the States, when they had a right to assume their imperial dignity and command obedience. Be that as it may, requisitions are a perfect nihility, where thirteen sovereign, independent[,] disunited States are in the habit of discussing & refusing compliance with them at their option. Requisitions are actually little better than a jest and a bye word through out the Land. If you tell the Legislatures they have violated the treaty of peace and invaded the prerogatives of the confederacy they will laugh in your face. What then is to be done? Things cannot go on in the same train forever. It is much to be feared, as you observe, that the better kind of people being disgusted with the circumstances will have their minds prepared for any revolution whatever. We are apt to run from one extreme into another. To anticipate & prevent disasterous contingencies would be the part of wisdom & patriotism.”

    It appears even the much admired Washington was having none of the talk of independence and wanted a firm hand on the yoke of the states to make them obey their masters on high. Washington’s behavior in the Whiskey Rebellion cast away any doubts of the imperious behavior of the central government a mere four year after the adoption of the Constitution.

    continued at...http://zerogov.com/?p=3633
    "The Patriarch"



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    I totally missed that holiday. It was yesterday/on the verge of being 2 days ago. It's not really worth celebrating. It's been a failure to protect human rights. But I suppose it might have protected a few rights for a while. The whole thing is winding down.

  4. #3
    Limited government *is* possible. But, it requires diligently violent Men to preserve it.
    “One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Czolgosz View Post
    Limited government *is* possible. But, it requires diligently violent Men to preserve it.
    What we have are psychotically violent men opposed to it.
    "The Patriarch"

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Czolgosz View Post
    Limited government *is* possible. But, it requires diligently violent Men to preserve it.
    LOL It's also possible that pigs can sprout wings and fly...
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  7. #6
    Periodic revolution, “at least once every 20 years,” was “a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.” -- Thomas Jefferson 3rd President (1801-1809)

  8. #7
    The Constitution did not fail because of flaws inherit to every document. It failed from the lack of conviction of our leaders to uphold the principles and the spirit that the Constitution represents. Living Documents only live because the people themselves are what breathe life into these documents. It was no different than the Magna Carta. We could just as easily point a finger at that document as having failed as well, but it did not fail for lack of wordsmithing, but from the lack of conviction. Without that precious conviction, all documents can be nothing more than words on paper or pixles on a screen.
    1776 > 1984

    The FAILURE of the United States Government to operate and maintain an
    Honest Money System , which frees the ordinary man from the clutches of the money manipulators, is the single largest contributing factor to the World's current Economic Crisis.

    The Elimination of Privacy is the Architecture of Genocide

    Belief, Money, and Violence are the three ways all people are controlled

    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Our central bank is not privately owned.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    LOL It's also possible that pigs can sprout wings and fly...
    True, with the pansified men walking around today. Indeed.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    You know, it's these types of threads that cause a great many people, who would have worked right alongside of us, to want to get as far away from us as they can.

    Ron Paul stressed for many years the importance of our government adhering to the Constitution. No, it's not perfect, but it's the best any country has ever had. So, instead of touting the principles that this country once held dear, some here take the opportunity on Constitution Day, to ignorantly claim that a piece of paper could do anything at all without an educated and vigilant population insisting that it be followed. Just wonderful, guys.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    The Constitution did not fail because of flaws inherit to every document. It failed from the lack of conviction of our leaders to uphold the principles and the spirit that the Constitution represents. Living Documents only live because the people themselves are what breathe life into these documents. It was no different than the Magna Carta. We could just as easily point a finger at that document as having failed as well, but it did not fail for lack of wordsmithing, but from the lack of conviction. Without that precious conviction, all documents can be nothing more than words on paper or pixles on a screen.
    I don't really think that it failed. I think it functions EXACTLY as the Federalists designed it, and as the prescient Anti-federalists predicted it would.

    It could also be argued, I believe, that it didn't fail, it was murdered.

  13. #11
    You know the country is going down the $#@!ter when people are more concerned about the right to own a gun than the economy/foreign policy/etc.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by 56ktarget View Post
    You know the country is going down the $#@!ter when people are more concerned about the right to own a gun than the economy/foreign policy/etc.
    Or when they elect Obama, W, and Bubba to each be POTUS twice.

  15. #13
    New Zealand, which is generally rated higher than the US in personal and economic freedoms, has no constitution to speak of.

    It's nearly a pure democracy with no checks or balances except an informed and active populace.
    In New Zealand:
    The Coastguard is a Charity
    Air Traffic Control is a private company run on user fees
    The DMV is a private non-profit
    Rescue helicopters and ambulances are operated by charities and are plastered with corporate logos
    The agriculture industry has zero subsidies
    5% of the national vote, gets you 5 seats in Parliament
    A tax return has 4 fields
    Business licenses aren't a thing
    Prostitution is legal
    We have a constitutional right to refuse any type of medical care

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    What we have are psychotically violent men opposed to it.
    Correct, but let us look to root causes. The ultimate shame lies at OUR feet and not those of the political figures whose scurrilous acts we have tolerated since the very beginning of the Republic. Had we set the precedent ca. 1790 wherein the least violation by an official or other instrument of the so-called "state" been met with a bullet to the head or a length of good stiff rope, I daresay we would not be in the pickle in which we now find ourselves. We might be in other pickles, mind you, but not this one.

    The sorts of people who seek political office are generally of a lower character than even the average man. There are exceptions like Ron Paul, but these are few and far between. Like snakes, such people are what they are. Part of that which defines "viper" is "bite". One cannot blame the viper for biting, but one can either avoid it or kill it in the event it attacks. The same with politicians. We can avoid dirtying our hands with them and, in the event such persons threaten us, we can kill them. Just as I am authorized by my inherent right to life to take the life from anyone threatening to do me grave harm, so are we all entitled by the same right to destroy the material reality of any governmental agent, elected, appointed, or hired, when they threaten the sanctity of our rights. We almost universally demur and have done so since the beginning.

    Therefore, the shame and guilt lies squarely with us and nobody else.

    Think of that the next time you find yourself looking in the mirror.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    The Constitution did not fail because of flaws inherit to every document.
    Coprrect in the strict sense. Less so in the sense that the Constitution is not well written. It is elegantly written and it appears that many people confuse pretty elegance with clarity, completeness, and correctness - in other words, with efficiency.

    It failed from the lack of conviction of our leaders to uphold the principles and the spirit that the Constitution represents.
    I am afraid, my pal, this is not quite correct, it being partially so at best. The failure issued from the governed when they abdicated their responsibilities to themselves and their fellows, thereby effectively waiving the rights of all and conceding absolute authority to those occupying the seats of power.

    Living Documents only live because the people themselves are what breathe life into these documents.
    May I suggest that this was a poor choice of terms for a sentiment that I believe may be otherwise agreeable?

    It was no different than the Magna Carta. We could just as easily point a finger at that document as having failed as well, but it did not fail for lack of wordsmithing, but from the lack of conviction. Without that precious conviction, all documents can be nothing more than words on paper or pixles on a screen.
    The question of conviction notwithstanding, it is the failure to act correctly that ultimately dooms us and that failure almost always hinges on our failure to think correctly.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The sorts of people who seek political office are generally of a lower character than even the average man. There are exceptions like Ron Paul, but these are few and far between.
    Bollocks. The quality of the average man has gone down. Otherwise there would be rioting in the streets. Everyone *wants* what they are getting because they think they can get more out of the scam than everyone else is losing.
    In New Zealand:
    The Coastguard is a Charity
    Air Traffic Control is a private company run on user fees
    The DMV is a private non-profit
    Rescue helicopters and ambulances are operated by charities and are plastered with corporate logos
    The agriculture industry has zero subsidies
    5% of the national vote, gets you 5 seats in Parliament
    A tax return has 4 fields
    Business licenses aren't a thing
    Prostitution is legal
    We have a constitutional right to refuse any type of medical care



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by 56ktarget View Post
    You know the country is going down the $#@!ter when people are more concerned about the right to own a gun than the economy/foreign policy/etc.
    You know your government is effective when you are distracted by issues out of your control.

    All modern revolutions have ended in a reinforcement of the power of the State.
    -Albert Camus

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    The Constitution did not fail because of flaws inherit to every document. It failed from the lack of conviction of our leaders to uphold the principles and the spirit that the Constitution represents. Living Documents only live because the people themselves are what breathe life into these documents. It was no different than the Magna Carta. We could just as easily point a finger at that document as having failed as well, but it did not fail for lack of wordsmithing, but from the lack of conviction. Without that precious conviction, all documents can be nothing more than words on paper or pixles on a screen.
    Sorry, can't rep you again. But this is correct.

    There are simply no words possible to ensure the liberty of men forever. Words cannot do that. It doesn't matter what configuration of words or syllables, there will be those that choose to twist them, derive new meaning from them, or simply ignore them. If you get enough of those people, you can make the whole document meaningless. No matter what the document said. The Constitution is about the document of sentiments that has ever been ratified, but it is not the document that is at fault. It is human nature. Humans will not be constrained by words - for better or worse.

    For example... There are many written words of "law" that I choose to ignore every day. Just because someone wrote them down, doesn't mean I'm going to follow them. Why should I expect our politicians to be any different? The only difference is that their words infringe upon my liberty to do as I please, and the Constitution's words infringe upon their desire to infringe upon my liberty. If they have a desire to do something opposed to those words, they will find a way. It is up to the people to be ever vigilant. Unfortunately, most of our citizenry have been educated by the same government that wishes to rule them.

    So instead of relying on the words, I'll rely on my gun and live free until the day I die.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    You know, it's these types of threads that cause a great many people, who would have worked right alongside of us, to want to get as far away from us as they can.

    Ron Paul stressed for many years the importance of our government adhering to the Constitution. No, it's not perfect, but it's the best any country has ever had. So, instead of touting the principles that this country once held dear, some here take the opportunity on Constitution Day, to ignorantly claim that a piece of paper could do anything at all without an educated and vigilant population insisting that it be followed. Just wonderful, guys.
    There's nothing wrong with sharing dissenting thoughts about the Constitution.

    It is just a piece of paper in the end and it's clear that, whether it is a pillar of liberty or not, that we the people have failed to keep the Government in check, Constitution or no Constitution.

    I find pieces like this interesting because it challenges what I believe and makes me honestly take my positions and what I support and reexamine them.

    It makes me want to study the Constitution again, which I probably should to refresh my memory. I should probably also study the Bible again because it's been a while since I've glanced at that as well.

    If people are turned away because we want to discuss the Constitution in a way that isn't always idolatry and praise, then they aren't being intellectually honest with themselves.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sister Miriam Godwinson View Post
    We Must Dissent.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    The Constitution did not fail because of flaws inherit to every document. It failed from the lack of conviction of our leaders to uphold the principles and the spirit that the Constitution represents. Living Documents only live because the people themselves are what breathe life into these documents. It was no different than the Magna Carta. We could just as easily point a finger at that document as having failed as well, but it did not fail for lack of wordsmithing, but from the lack of conviction. Without that precious conviction, all documents can be nothing more than words on paper or pixles on a screen.

    "Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class." -- Albert Jay Nock

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Correct, but let us look to root causes. The ultimate shame lies at OUR feet and not those of the political figures whose scurrilous acts we have tolerated since the very beginning of the Republic. Had we set the precedent ca. 1790 wherein the least violation by an official or other instrument of the so-called "state" been met with a bullet to the head or a length of good stiff rope, I daresay we would not be in the pickle in which we now find ourselves. We might be in other pickles, mind you, but not this one.

    The sorts of people who seek political office are generally of a lower character than even the average man. There are exceptions like Ron Paul, but these are few and far between. Like snakes, such people are what they are. Part of that which defines "viper" is "bite". One cannot blame the viper for biting, but one can either avoid it or kill it in the event it attacks. The same with politicians. We can avoid dirtying our hands with them and, in the event such persons threaten us, we can kill them. Just as I am authorized by my inherent right to life to take the life from anyone threatening to do me grave harm, so are we all entitled by the same right to destroy the material reality of any governmental agent, elected, appointed, or hired, when they threaten the sanctity of our rights. We almost universally demur and have done so since the beginning.

    Therefore, the shame and guilt lies squarely with us and nobody else.

    Think of that the next time you find yourself looking in the mirror.
    Aye, what you say is true. It is also true that almost right from the start there were those that did try to repulse those that infringed on them and were ruthlessly dealt with. (by the same people crying liberty and freedom a few years earlier)
    Last edited by Origanalist; 09-19-2014 at 08:30 AM.
    "The Patriarch"

  25. #22
    A right is something you'd die for, before letting it be taken away. In that regard no living man can have his rights removed. Write it in the constitution, the new bible, the new world peace pact, whatever you want to call it, that is what it always breaks down to, and the knock over effect is as long as that threat is alive rights are not encroached upon by the powers that be, but when the threat is not present, even if written down and acknowledged by the powers that be, they do not exist and will not be respected.

    IMO.

  26. #23
    Ron Paul has emphasized following the Constitution because it is a largely libertarian document that tries to contain government power through many mechanisms, and also because it is politically useful in providing mainstream cover for communicating liberty principles to a public who might otherwise reject it. It made it fundamentally easier for him to quickly explain his many no votes, by just stressing the legislation ran contrary to the expressed original intent of the Constitution, versus him going over the liberty problems with each bill.

    If there had been no federal Constitution, and the founders had simply amended the Articles of Confederation, the centralizers would have found a way to simply gut that document as well. This is also important for understanding the "failure" of government documents---i.e., statists simply learn how to artfully deviate from the original intent, especially as time passes and more people forget the original meaning. The easiest way has been to procedurally neglect it (e.g., replace a stated constitutional process with a sub-constitutional statutory one, then set aside the former as "archaic"). Instead of violating the "declaration of war" provision outright, to cite one case, statists simply create a "War Powers Authorization" statute, reputedly to address a "special situation" where the President needed leeway to deploy the military in a hurry, then clearly use it thereafter to justify any military action without Congressional approval.

    This tactic is aided by the inconsistency of many people in upholding the primacy of Constitutional intent, as seen in the debate over Obarry's citizenship and photoshopped birth certificate. Per the Constitution/original intent, he is not a natural born citizen (as one parent was not American, and he grew up as a Indonesian citizen as per his school and adult records there), thus is not qualified to be President. But because of the statutory citizenship laws permit him to be construed as legitimately American, the original Constitutional requirements are set aside---even by many Paul supporters. So if even we set aside the Constitutional meaning when it comes to natural born citizenship, how can we then complain when the pro-war people set it aside when it comes to launching undeclared wars?

    This is how the Constitution 'failed,' by people selectively supporting it, but settling for statutory, case law or precedents that utterly undo it, whenever upholding original intent is felt to be too politically uncomfortable.
    Last edited by Peace&Freedom; 09-19-2014 at 12:44 PM.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    Blog: https://electclifton.wordpress.com/2...back-backlash/

  27. #24
    “Though written Constitutions may be violated in moments of passion or delusion, yet they furnish a text to which those who are watchful may again rally and recall the people"

    ― Thomas Jeffeson 1802
    Being mad at the constitution for not restraining government is about like being mad at a history book whenever people repeat history. There is a large degree of responsibility on the part of people. It's right there on the paper. Didn't they read it? If the answer is 'no,' it's hardly the paper's fault.

    Vigilance is required on the part of human beings to retain freedom. Inanimate objects will neither preserve nor destroy it, but as Jefferson said, it's nice to have something in writing to remind folks.
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    This is getting silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    It started silly.
    T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato

    We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me

    Quote Originally Posted by Philhelm
    I part ways with "libertarianism" when it transitions from ideology grounded in logic into self-defeating autism for the sake of ideological purity.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by 56ktarget View Post
    You know the country is going down the $#@!ter when people are more concerned about the right to own a gun than the economy/foreign policy/etc.
    The right to own a gun is the only reason you still have the right to flap your dick-sucker. On second thought YOU (a communist) would still have the right, all opposed would be imprisoned for speaking their minds, kind of like Europe is today.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    Being mad at the constitution for not restraining government is about like being mad at a history book whenever people repeat history. There is a large degree of responsibility on the part of people. It's right there on the paper. Didn't they read it? If the answer is 'no,' it's hardly the paper's fault.

    Vigilance is required on the part of human beings to retain freedom. Inanimate objects will neither preserve nor destroy it, but as Jefferson said, it's nice to have something in writing to remind folks.
    Well in all fairness, it WAS written in secret, and behind closed doors. Article VII provides for a very sneaky ratification process. It was an illegal unauthorized extension of their official assignment. It was read by MAYBE 10,000 folks before being ratified, out of a total population of several millions. It CONstituted (pun intended) a coup by the Federalists against the lawful Articles of Confederation.

    And even then, with all that it still just barely squeaked by in a rigged process.

    Got a real winner there, folks. A real testament to historic revisionism, PR, propaganda and a government schooling system.

    "Official" history is most often and usually written by the winners.

    “Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” -- Ron Paul

  31. #27
    Gentlemen,

    Enjoying the conversation, I am the author of the essay and my main point is that the document was designed to promote and expand big government despite the protestations of both contemporary and modern observers.

    It codified slavery both overtly and covertly.

    Bill Buppert

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by 56ktarget View Post
    You know the country is going down the $#@!ter when people are more concerned about the right to own a gun than the economy/foreign policy/etc.
    You know the country is going down the $#@!ter when people make statements such as that, above, thereby trumpeting to the world the grand degree to which government has perfected its assault upon young intellects, eventually reducing them in such manner as is here illustrated.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by DamianTV View Post
    The Constitution did not fail because of flaws inherit to every document. It failed from the lack of conviction of our leaders to uphold the principles and the spirit that the Constitution represents. Living Documents only live because the people themselves are what breathe life into these documents. It was no different than the Magna Carta. We could just as easily point a finger at that document as having failed as well, but it did not fail for lack of wordsmithing, but from the lack of conviction. Without that precious conviction, all documents can be nothing more than words on paper or pixles on a screen.
    Very eloquently put, as usual, and I completely agree. +rep
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    Above all I think everyone needs to understand that neither the Bundys nor Finicum were militia or had prior military training. They were, first and foremost, Ranchers who had about all the shit they could take.
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.
    "I'll believe in good cops when they start turning bad cops in."

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    In a free society there will be bigotry, and racism, and sexism and religious disputes and, and, and.......
    I don't want to live in a cookie cutter, federally mandated society.
    Give me messy freedom every time!

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody's_hero View Post
    Being mad at the constitution for not restraining government is about like being mad at a history book whenever people repeat history.
    On the money. Our Constitution is weak - it could be a LOT better, but as I have often repeated here, many of the apparent intentions of the document are noble and correct. Given that, the document's weaknesses serve only to underscore OUR weaknesses as individuals in terms of our knowledge (or rather ignorance) and attitudes. The Constitution has not failed. We have.

    Vigilance is required on the part of human beings to retain freedom. Inanimate objects will neither preserve nor destroy it, but as Jefferson said, it's nice to have something in writing to remind folks.
    Agreed. Nothing wrong with a constitution. The problem is that people tend to be lazy, especially along certain lines and often under specific conditions. They will pawn their responsibilities off on others any time the can get away with it. And here we are.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Ron Paul - Our Constitution...has failed.
    By Anti Federalist in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 07-07-2020, 03:58 PM
  2. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 09-19-2014, 08:03 AM
  3. Ron Paul: 'Our Constitution Has Failed' to restrain government
    By RonPaulFanInGA in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 11-20-2012, 05:55 PM
  4. Is the Constitution a failed experiment?
    By Matt Collins in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 179
    Last Post: 08-18-2010, 09:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •