Restoring the Lost Constitution

[CuteOldGuy]

Excellent essay on how the Constitution got so screwed up, and what we can do to fix it. It's a little long, and has some big words, so I hope you liberals can find someone to read and explain it to you. It would help you out a lot!

From the article:

Those are matters that cannot be evaded, however, if we are to restore the lost Constitution. To justify a presumption of constitutionality, the Supreme Court had to eliminate passages that inconveniently stood in the way. A presumption of liberty would hold Congress to its enumerated powers, and states to their proper police power, while protecting the rights retained by the people and the privileges and immunities of citizens. For, despite the best efforts of the Supreme Court over the past two centuries, all those portions of the text are still to be found in the actual Constitution of the United States. You don’t have to take my word for this. You can look it up.

Read the entire essay (or have someone read it to you) here:

http://www.libertarianism.org/public...t-constitution

[joe bloe]

We'll never go back to the Constitution. Once mob rule takes over, is over.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy."

[CuteOldGuy]

I'm afraid you are correct, sir.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I'm afraid you are correct, sir.

I think it was some sort of fluke that the Constitution ever came into being. The stars must have been in perfect alignment or something. It was fun while it lasted.

I think Franklin would be surprised we kept it as long as we did.

[Yssup Rider]

Zat the same Franklin who started the mint and made those commemorative coins you brainiacs are so fond of?

[SEE3772]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Zat the same Franklin who started the mint and made those commemorative coins you brainiacs are so fond of?

Bullion coins, get it right...

[TexTushHog]

The words of the Constitution … are so unrestricted by their intrinsic meaning or by their history or by tradition or by prior decisions that they leave the individual Justice free, if indeed they do not compel him, to gather meaning not from reading the Constitution but from reading life. —Felix Frankfurter, Supreme Court Justice

[CuteOldGuy]

Felix Frankfurter was an idiot. That is not what the Constitution was ever meant to be. It was meant to be a solid foundation for the protection of liberty. Not a shifting, unstable document designed to mean whatever the winds of opinion meant.

[timpage]

What big words did you not understand? I didn't see any, but maybe I can help you.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Excellent essay on how the Constitution got so screwed up, and what we can do to fix it. It's a little long, and has some big words, so I hope you liberals can find someone to read and explain it to you. It would help you out a lot!

From the article:

Those are matters that cannot be evaded, however, if we are to restore the lost Constitution. To justify a presumption of constitutionality, the Supreme Court had to eliminate passages that inconveniently stood in the way. A presumption of liberty would hold Congress to its enumerated powers, and states to their proper police power, while protecting the rights retained by the people and the privileges and immunities of citizens. For, despite the best efforts of the Supreme Court over the past two centuries, all those portions of the text are still to be found in the actual Constitution of the United States. You don’t have to take my word for this. You can look it up.

Read the entire essay (or have someone read it to you) here:

http://www.libertarianism.org/public...t-constitution

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by TexTushHog

The words of the Constitution … are so unrestricted by their intrinsic meaning or by their history or by tradition or by prior decisions that they leave the individual Justice free, if indeed they do not compel him, to gather meaning not from reading the Constitution but from reading life. —Felix Frankfurter, Supreme Court Justice

“With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” James Madison

"[It is important] not to enlarge the construction of a given power beyond the fair scope of its terms, merely because the restriction is inconvenient, impolitic, or even mischievous. If it be mischievous, the power of redressing the evil lies with the people by an exercise of the power of amendment. If they do not choose to apply the remedy, it may fairly be presumed, that the mischief is less than what would arise from a further extension of the power; or that it is the least of two evils. Nor should it ever be lost sight of, that the government of the United States is one of limited and enumerated powers; and that a departure from the true import and sense of its powers is, pro tanto, the establishment of a new constitution. It is doing for the people, what they have not chosen to do for themselves It is usurping the functions of a legislator, and deserting those of an expounder of the law. Arguments drawn from impolicy or inconvenience ought here to be of no weight. The only sound principle is to declare, ita lex scripta est, to follow, and to obey. Nor, if a principle so just and conclusive could be overlooked, could there well be found a more unsafe guide in practice, than mere policy and convenience. Men on such subjects complexionally differ from each other. The same men differ from themselves at different times. Temporary delusions, prejudices, excitements, and objects have irresistible influence in mere questions of policy. And the policy of one age may ill suit the wishes, or the policy of another. The constitution is not to be subject to such fluctuations. It is to have a fixed, uniform, permanent construction. It should be, so far at least as human infirmity will allow, not dependent upon the passions or parties of particular times, but the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever." Justice Joseph Story

[Guest040616]

More gibberish from StupidOldLyingFart!

Why don't you get off of your lazy ass and go find a job? Somebody's bound to be hiring a toilet cleaner!

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

We'll never go back to the Constitution. Once mob rule takes over, is over.

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy."

I will use this as my signature. I hope people will read it everytime I post and keep it in their memory...

[JD Barleycorn]

I don't believe its over yet. There may be a collapse (and that is looking more and more certain) but I think the country will rise again and with the same Constitution. If the left got absolute power they would trip all over each other trying to advance each individual agenda. The patriot right has the framework of the Constitution, a goal, an ideal to strive for which the left does not have.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I don't believe its over yet. There may be a collapse (and that is looking more and more certain) but I think the country will rise again and with the same Constitution. If the left got absolute power they would trip all over each other trying to advance each individual agenda. The patriot right has the framework of the Constitution, a goal, an ideal to strive for which the left does not have.

Yep, the 'shine, errrrrrr TEA is especially potent this time of year!

[Jewish Lawyer]

Let's face it, we have a parliamentary style government controlled by liberals, and the only time the constitution matters is when it benefits them. We might as well give up the charade of following the constitution.
When does it benefit conservatives?
They laugh at states rights.
They laugh at the 2nd amendment. (Once they get the gun control laws passed, you will see we get no benefit from the Bill of Rights)
Equal protection of the laws is bastardized to support affirmative action.
Free speech - another joke - if you spout extreme opinions they will monitor you and use it against you - ask any KKK member on trial.
Free press - that one is pretty good, but it is enforced by tradition and custom as much as anything else.
When does the Supreme Court rule in our favor? Even Justice Roberts bowed to Obama.
Fourth amendment is also strongly written into common law, so it's usefulness won't be lost for now, which I'm happy about.

Conservatives - let's give up on the constitution and admit defeat to the liberal parliamentarians, and start playing their game better than them. They are openly contemptuous of us and what we believe, and they think we are a joke. They know we are doomed by demographics under the current system which they actually control and benefit from even as they disparage it as created by dead white slaveowners. So, let's call their bluff and go for broke. Tear up the constitution and admit we follow the English parliamentary system, and take away the Supremes powers. What do we have to lose?