Thread: Understanding the US Constitution We talk about it, but what do we know about it? -

Understanding the US Constitution
We talk about it, but what do we know about it?

What is a right? What is a privilege?
The US Constitution, the great blueprint.

What is a right? What is a privilege?
The US Constitution, the great blueprint.

You can read it in about 20 minutes, but it takes at least eight hours just to wrap your mind the basics.

What's a right? What's a privilege?

What kind of government does the United States have? Was it designed to be a democracy, or something else?

Ready to dive in?

Make sure you watch the first 15 minutes.

- See more at: http://www.brasschecktv.com/videos/h....gT1M2rBj.dpuf

Most of what you think you know about the US is wrong.

Starting with the Constitution...

Video:

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/26480.html

- Brasscheck

P.S. Please share Brasscheck TV e-mails and
videos with friends and colleagues.

That's how we grow. Thanks.



Uploaded on Jan 27, 2012
The 2004 Libertarian Presidential Candidate, Michael Badnarik teaches his famous class about the Constitution.

If you don't know the difference between a right and a privilege, this is a must see! If you think you know the difference, then answer this question: Is the US a democracy? For the answer (surprisingly), watch this video.

Imagine Bush and Kerry in a debate with Badnarik... He'd wipe the floor with both of them.

Recorded: September 10th 2001

www.ConstitutionPreservation.​org

WEBSITES TO CHECK OUT:

http://youtube.com/allaudiobible
http://youtube.com/astonisher1
http://youtube.com/astonisher2
http://facebook.com/100002139371230
http://twitter.com/astonisher
http://dailypaul.com
http://ronpaul2012.com
http://campaignforliberty.org
http://hightidepromo.com
http://infowars.com
http://infowarsnews.com
http://infowars.com/prison-planet-forum
http://infowarsteam.com
http://prisonplanet.tv
http://prisonplanet.com
http://JonesReport.com
http://InfoWars.net
http://TruthNews.us
http://endgamethemovie.com
http://drudgereport.com
http://archive.org/details/Michael_Ba...
http://constitutionpreservation.org
http://themoneymasters.com
http://weaintgottimetobleed.com
http://youtube.com/view_play_list?p=9...
http://trendsresearch.com
http://theinternationalforecaster.com
http://maxkeiser.com
http://markdice.com
http://wearechange.org
http://davidicke.com
http://youtube.com/davidicke
http://adask.wordpress.com
http://naturalnews.com
http://oathkeepers.org
http://gunowners.org
http://www.mises.org
http://lewrockwell.com
http://earthpulse.com
http://www.lp.org/

FAIR USE NOTICE: This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

• Category
  
  Nonprofits & Activism
• License
  
  Standard YouTube License

America is a Constitutional Republic . . . NOT a Democracy

By Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D.
Speech Given September 9, 2006 in Salt Lake City, Utah

How often have you heard people refer to America as a Democracy? When was the last time that you heard America referred to as a Republic? There is a very good reason that our Pledge of Allegiance refers to our country as a Republic and there is a very good reason that our Declaration of Independence and our constitution do not even mentioned the word "democracy".

Many people are under the false impression our form of government is a democracy, or representative democracy. This is of course completely untrue. The Founders were extremely knowledgeable about the issue of democracy and feared a democracy as much as a monarchy. They understood that the only entity that can take away the people's freedom is their own government, either by being too weak to protect them from external threats or by becoming too powerful and taking over every aspect of life.


They knew very well the meaning of the word "democracy", and the history of democracies; and they were deliberately doing everything in their power to prevent having a democracy.



In a Republic, the sovereignty resides with the people themselves. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives when he chooses to solve a problem. The people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government is a servant of the people, and obliged to its owner, We the People. Many politicians have lost sight of that fact.


A Constitutional Republic has some similarities to democracy in that it uses democratic processes to elect representatives and pass new laws, etc. The critical difference lies in the fact that a Constitutional Republic has a Constitution that limits the powers of the government. It also spells out how the government is structured, creating checks on its power and balancing power between the different branches.


The goal of a Constitutional Republic was to avoid the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy but what exists in America today is a far cry from the Constitutional Republic our forefathers brought forth.


Today we have DO have a mobocracy occurring in our streets all across America. Sadly, such mobocracy or 'mob rule' was endorsed and encouraged by Sen. John McCain who praised the recent wave of pro-illegal immigration demonstrations by saying . . . "if the protesters hang tough they will succeed in forcing Congress to liberalize immigration laws. If such demonstrations continue, I think we will have a bill for the President to sign soon . . . The more debate, the more demonstrations, the more likely we will prevail.' He was of course referring to the Senate's massive illegal-alien amnesty bill S. 2611 which did in fact, pass. Was S. 2611 passed to appease the mob? If so, it is a perfect example of rule by mobocracy!


Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution states: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion . . .


Not only is our Constitution being ignored, the exact OPPOSITE is being encourage by John McCain and seconded by ALL those who voted for S. 2611 in the Senate. If you want to preserve the Constitutional Republic you should vote out of office . . . every single senator that voted for S. 2611.
My favorite quote is by Tom Tancredo who speaks to the treasonous position of those who would promote anarchy and mobocracy in our streets. He said: "When I took the oath of office, it wasn't to my party or the President. It was to the Constitution."


However, rule by mobocracy is only a tiny part of what is happening here in America. The larger problem we are facing is related to those who would support and approve of mob rule. It is called tyranny. What is tyranny? Simply put, we are being governed by tyrants who have usurped the will of the people. Our government has become a raging bull elephant, no pun intended, and is totally out of control. We are well on the road to fascism, which was defined by Mussolini as the combining of capitalism and Communism.


There is underway . . . a betrayal of the American people by a government cabal who are bent on destroying our sovereignty in order to create a North American Union. The miscreants include many who function at the highest levels in our government. Many hold membership in the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Trilateral Commission and pursue a subversive agenda. The cabal is deliberately circumventing the U.S. Congress and 'We the People' in blatant violation of our Constitution. Collectively they are committing TREASON. If you continue to believe that the illegal alien invasion is the biggest threat to America, you will never understand that there is something far more dangerous to our country called the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" (SPP). As bad as the illegal alien situation is . . . you will learn that this nation is in dire peril far exceeding the illegal alien problem.


I urge you to educate yourself. If you have access to a computer you need to read what your own government has posted on their official websites such as the Whitehouse.gov,SPP.gov, State.gov and Canada.USembassy.gov. You will be aghast at the nearly complete destruction of our sovereignty, Bill of Rights, Constitution, laws, Republic, and freedoms they have ALREADY achieved. This heinous ongoing treason has been engineered by an entrenched cabal of legislators, courts, military brass, and government employees in this and prior administrations. The tyranny is being facilitated by hundreds of people embedded at all levels of the executive branch and Congress constituting a so called 'Shadow Government' who are working in concert to dismantle this country in plain sight. Their agenda was engineered by the Council on Foreign Relations(CFR) and kept secret by a deliberately silent media who work in collaboration by treating the America people like mushrooms. We are kept in the dark and fed you know what . . . mislead by their propaganda.


If you don't have a computer, get one. It is the last bastion of freedom to information and knowledge left to' We the People'. Be advised that the congress is working hard to eliminate, curtail and control your access to the internet as we speak.


Why is it Most Americans are Unaware of the CFR Organization . . .


David Rockefeller chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) for 15 years (1970-1985), also founded and is the honorary chairman of the Trilateral Commission. His father John D. and brother Nelson purchased and then donated the land beneath the UN for $8.5 million dollars, then claimed it as a charitable deduction.


As for how the machinations of the CFR have remained unnoticed . . . in 1991 in Baden-Baden, Germany, David Rockefeller gloatingly said: "We're grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government.." . . . Are you?
CFR member Richard N. Gardner, who in a 1974 article titled: "The Hard Road to World Order" wrote: In short, the "house of world order" will have to be built from the bottom up rather than the top down [and require] . . . an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece.
And what does David Rockefeller say about his work?


"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interest of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists ' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

What colossal arrogance! Like other globalists, he loses sight of man's humanity and the very fundamental nature of what it is to BE human. Mankind will ALWAYS resist subjugation and will ALWAYS struggle to have and maintain their freedoms . . . after all . . . for us Americans . . . it is the very essence of what it is to BE an American.

The Council on Foreign Relations has placed its membership in policy-making positions with the State Department and other federal agencies. Every Secretary of State since 1944, with the exception of James F. Byrnes, has been a member of the [CFR] council." The trend continues today as both Condalezza Rice and Colin Powell are members of the CFR.

Some Others Who have Spoken Out About the 'Shadow Government':
"Rear Admiral Chester Ward, USN (Retd.), who was a member of the CFR for sixteen years. He wrote, 'The most powerful clique in these elitist groups have one objective in common--They want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the United States."
"Felix Frankfurter, Justice of the Supreme Court (1939-1962) said: The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes."
In a speech given on February 23, 1954, Senator William Jenner warned America: "Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government, a bureaucratic elite which believes our Constitution is outmoded."
In fact, the Constitution is far more than 'outmoded,' according to President Bush who rebuffed GOP leader's request to soft pedal some parts of the 'Patriot Act' by saying: "I don't give a goddamn . . . I'm the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way." Then, responding to an aid who stated: "There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution." Bush screamed back: "Stop throwing the constitution in my face . . . It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"


As for the 'bureaucratic elite' of wealthy globalists who function as the 'Shadow Government' . . . their ultimate goal is a so called NEW World Order, which is course is NOT NEW but is, in reality, a ONE World Order. To that end, Franklin Delano Roosevelt managed to condemn their monopolist lust from the grave in a message found enshrined on his memorial in Washington, DC:

THEY (WHO) SEEK TO ESTABLISH
SYSTEMS OF GOVERNMENT BASED ON
THE REGIMENTATION OF ALL HUMAN
BEINGS BY A HANDFUL OF INDIVIDUAL
RULERS CALL THIS A NEW ORDER
IT IS NOT NEW AND IT IS NOT ORDER

If you think about it, by sending our manufacturing base to Mexico or other foreign countries, the globalists have FORCED America to become global when in the past we were self-sufficient and produced all we needed for ourselves and exported our excess around the world. Now we are dependent on countries like Communist China, etc., to supply stores like Wal-mart with nearly all of its merchandise.

The 'Shadow Government has begun their 'race to the finish' and have become ever more arrogant and bold. They have concluded that they are so close to complete conquest that they are ever more blatantly flouting our Constitution and laws than you can ever imagine in your wildest of dreams of hell on earth.


Didn't you ever wonder why our borders are still wide open?
Didn't you ever wonder why our immigration laws are unenforced?
Didn't you ever wonder why CAFTA was passed in the House by two recanted votes after the time for voting had expired? Especially in light of the fact that most ordinary people would agree that NAFTA has been such a devastating failure for both Mexico and America.

Didn't you ever wonder why the Senate told 83% of 'We the People' to 'go to hell' when they passed the amnesty bill S. 2611 which will add 100 million people to America in the next ten years according to Dr. Robert Rector of the Heritage Institute. That number is a CONSERVATIVE estimate since statisticians extrapolated those numbers from the 2000 census to arrive at the totally bogus figures of 10-12 million illegals.

Didn't you ever wonder why the reconquista rabble can march in our streets and shout from the roof tops that they want to take over the Southwest and our government doesn't investigate them for sedition like they did the VA nurse who wrote a letter to the editor complaining about the Iraq War, and the government's handling of Hurricane Katrina.



What is sedition? It is "The Stirring up of discontent, resistance, or rebellion against the government in power."


In "1968---The Hispanic organization, the Southwest Council of LaRaza Unida, was created with a $630,000 grant from the Ford Foundation, which supports the movement to bring massive numbers of Mexicans into the U.S. From 1968 to 1992, Ford Foundation grants to radical Hispanics totaled over $31 million. And according to Henry Santiestevan (former head of the Southwest Council of LaRaza), It would hardly be an exaggeration to say that the Ford Foundation IS the Chicano movement."


Along with the non-profit foundations that are funding the racist mobocracy, there has been a concerted effort by our own government to aid and abet the massive illegal alien anarchy you see in our streets.

In a speech made before the U.S. Senate on December 15, 1987 Senator Jesse Helms, spoke eloquently about the coming One World Order when he said:

"This campaign against the American people - against traditional American culture and values - is systematic psychological warfare. It is orchestrated by a vast array of interests comprising not only the Eastern establishment but also the radical left. Among this group we find the Department of State, the Department of Commerce, the money center banks and multinational corporations, the media, the educational establishment, the entertainment industry, and the large tax-exempt foundations.

A careful examination of what is happening behind the scenes reveals that all of these interests are working in concert with the masters of the Kremlin in order to create what some refer to as a New World Order. Private organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations, . . . the Trilateral Commission, .. . . Bilderberger Group serve to disseminate and to coordinate the plans for this so-called New World Order in powerful business, financial, academic, and official circles . . .

The influence of establishment insiders over our foreign policy has become a fact of life in our time. This pervasive influence runs contrary to the real long-term national security of our Nation. It is an influence which, if unchecked, could ultimately subvert our constitutional order.

In the globalist point of view, nation-states and national boundaries do not count for anything. Political philosophies and political principles seem to become simply relative. Indeed, even constitutions are irrelevant to the exercise of power. Liberty and tyranny are viewed as neither necessarily good nor evil, and certainly not a component of policy.

In their point of view, the activities of international financial and industrial forces should be oriented to bringing this one-world design - with a convergence of the Soviet and American systems as its centerpiece - into being . . . All that matters to this club is the maximization of profits resulting from the practice of what can be described as finance capitalism, a system which rests upon the twin pillars of debt and monopoly. This isn't real capitalism. It is the road to economic concentration and to political slavery.

Why ARE Our Borders STILL Wide Open, Our Laws Unenforced and Massive Amnesty Proffered . . .

Why does our government tyrannically trample on the rights of American citizens with impunity while it permits, and tacitly condones the racist, reconquista rabble in our streets and on our campuses by allowing them to flood across our borders and remain here unmolested? Could it be they WANT them here to foment their anti-Americanism, hostility, balkanization, racism, and sedition, while they flout their anarchy?
Is there something more to the story than illegal aliens rampaging in our streets calling for 'rights' which they have NO RIGHT to get? Mobs of lawbreakers who profess their allegiance to Mexico and other Latin American countries, defiling our flag, re-writing our National Anthem, shouting racist slogans on behalf of 'La Raza' -- The Race!



Can the deliberate non-action of our government to stop the massive 20-30 million illegal alien invasion of our country actually be part of a some hidden agenda?
In Order To Answer ALL of Those Disturbing Questions . . .
You need to understand that the illegal alien invasion is simply a diversion to keep our focus off the imminent implementation of the North American Union (NAU), the next step towards a One World Order (OWO). The illegal alien invasion is a tool being used to segue America into the North American Union. Just think about the DEFIANT Senate amnesty bill S. 2611 which insanely includes all manner of benefits, rights, privileges, 'a path to citizenship,' major increases in job stealing high tech visas AND a tripling of quotas for LEGAL immigration which is already over a million per year and does not include those seeking asylum.
Why did the Senate do such an insane thing in TOTAL and COMPLETE opposition to 'We the People' and in such abject disregard for the horrendous consequences it will foist upon our nation's future? It is, without doubt . . . "an 'open borders manifesto,' a nation killer."

The answer is as plain as the nose on your face. Many in the Senate AND the House AND the Executive are working in concert to create a North American Union. They are capitalists whose agenda is Communism which makes them classic fascists. They embrace the concept of a plutocracy, a world run by a wealthy few. Their goal is to achieve the few remaining unfulfilled tenets of the Communist Manifesto in order to put an end to America.

How Dishonest and Corrupt IS our Congress?
Did you know that, in 1999 and 2000, presidential candidate and then president-elect Vicente Fox had a foreign relations aide who met with "almost 80 U.S. congressmen and senators during numerous trips and at several events." The aide, Fredo Arias-king, attests that: "With just over 50 of them, my colleagues and I spoke about immigration in some depth, as it is one of the important bilateral topics [for Mexico]."
They found that: "American politicians are overwhelmingly pro-immigration, for a variety of reasons, and they do not always admit this to their constituents. Of those 50 legislators, 45 were unambiguously pro-immigration, even asking us at times to 'send more.' This was true of both Democrats and Republicans."(51)
His conclusions: " . . . mass immigration from Latin America is being used by the political class to undermine their democracy and as a tool to liberate the political elites from the Jeffersonian and Madisonian constraints.

The illegal alien problem is simply the MECHANISM for leveraging what is yet to come. Once the civil unrest and chaos caused by the overwhelming 'human tsunami' of illegal aliens reduces America to complete anarchy, a state of total lawlessness and riots or the bird flu pandemic arrives, or another 'Katrina' occurs, or a 'dirty bomb' is unleashed . . . the federal government will institute martial law. One of those events or some other inventive pretext will then allow the 'Shadow Government' to step forward and VISIBLY take over our country. They will use martial law to install a fascist One World Order dictatorial government in plain sight instead of clandestinely as they do now.

If you take the time to educate yourself . . . you will be stunned beyond belief at the nearly complete destruction of our sovereignty, Constitution, Bill of Rights and our Republic that has been accomplished thus far by the fascist cabal who deviously 'hides in plain sight.' All has been completed without ANY proper oversight by our Congress nor the knowledge or sanction by 'We the People.' How are they doing it?

The tri-lateral cabal consisting of President Fox, Prime Minister Martin, and President Bush have used NAFTA as a Trojan horse to create the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) which was officially announced on March 23, 2005, in Waco, Texas. The plan was little noticed when it was formally announced. Sadly it is . . . 'a day that will live in infamy!'

NAFTA, a supposed 'trade agreement' that has already cost millions of American jobs and closed many of our manufacturing plants has been deviously used to create the SPP. It was an ignominious day for America and all she stands for when the heads of state from three sovereign countries (Mexico, Canada and America) could simply mutually agree to deviously pervert the NAFTA agreement and create the Security and Properity Partnership, the SPP for short.

Having made their official announcement, President Bush believed he was then entitled to order the executive branch of our government to do his bidding to create the NAU under cover of the SPP without any oversight by Congress or informing the American public.
By presidential fiat, Bush has created "an end run around America's sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece" or rather 'department by department' just as announced by CFR member Richard Gardner in his 1974 Foreign Affairs article.

Bush has created, engaged and promoted theNorth American Competitiveness Council. What is their mission and goal? "INCREASING PRIVATE SECTOR ENGAGEMENT in the SPP by adding high-level BUSINESS INPUT will ASSIST GOVERNMENTS in enhancing North America's competitive position and ENGAGE THE PRIVATE SECTOR AS PARTNERS IN FINDING SOLUTIONS.
Wealthy corporate globalists, such as the Rockefellers, are working in concert with many in positions of power in our courts, military, and government who are members of the CFR, the Trilateral Commission, and attend the Bilderberg conferences. Their overarching desire is to create world political dominion controlled by corporate monopolies. Their goals are rooted in the ideologies of socialism, Communism, and Marxism. Collectively, they working diligently and secretly to create a FASCIST One World Order.

The gloabalist seek to increasingly transform our system of governance so that "we are moving from the system of representative government set forth in the U.S. Constitution to a system of collaborative policymaking by professional bureaucrats and business leaders.
For YEARS the CFR has been calling for the erasure of our borders. Dr. Pastor, a CFR task force Vice-Chair, has been trumpeting the concept, just about everywhere it mattered, working hard to achieve the CFR's stated goals. All the while 'We the People' were 'left out of the loop' until Lou Dobbs exposed the CFR's plans to eliminate our borders by 2010.
That would explain the administration's DELIBERATE unenforcement of our immigration laws and DHS' insane policies such as 'catch and release' and others that were used to keep the borders open. Such actions or rather non-actions and inexplicable policies were purposefully employed to create a de facto elimination of our borders . . . a major prerequisite for the North American Union.

The CFR and hundreds its of members have infiltrated our government at all levels . . . the legislative, the executive, the courts, and the military. They are the driving force and facilitators behind the CFR's publicly stated position that says the following: "An annual summit of North American leaders would do more to carry out our [CFR's]overall goal of creating a North American Community than virtually any of the report’s other recommendations. As we have seen with the annual Group of Seven/Eight (G-7/ and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summits, regular meetings of leaders not only help promote a sense of community and shared objectives, but channel the various bureaucracies each year to work on those common objectives."

"Whether on matters of security, education, or economic integration and development, annual summits will drive a process that will hasten the goals that we outline in our report. More to the point, an annual summit can be announced and implemented right away, giving tangible impetus to the good beginning made at the March 2005 summit and to the goals we promote here." Get the picture?

The CFR had reason to rejoice because: "At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts."

Although there are those who would deny there is ANY connection between the CFR and the creation of the Security and Prosperity Partnership as a vehicle for creating the North American Union, they are simply in severe denial, dupes or part of the cabal that is working to cover up the truth.

YOU . . . The Individual American Must Stand Up and Be Counted . . .

America is the only country in the world that can thwart the global fascists' drive to conquer mankind and achieve their plutocratic goal of world dominion by a select few.

© Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D., All Rights Reserved

http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion...Democracy.html




Beware America we are in grave danger of loosing our Republic!!!!!

More of the same information from many others!!!!

http://www.alipac.us/f19/psychopaths-run-world-294671/

Original Intent & a Constitutionally Constrained Representative Republic

The Common Constitutionalist 18 hours ago

The upcoming 2014 midterm elections have a different feel to them. We have a rare opportunity to send to Washington several real conservatives who may actually attempt to govern in accordance with the Constitution. Sad that it's rare, isn't it?

But governing by Constitution? What a quaint & provincial idea. I keep thinking, maybe this time we might just try it. Heck, we've either tried or been witness to every other failed type of Government. Why not give it a go? Why not try a constitutionally constrained Representative Republic?

The United States Constitution spells out plainly how to get it right, what is allowed & what isn't. Although this seems like a simple concept, and it is, lawmakers, the courts and academia purposely make it seem that the average Joe could never truly comprehend it.

When I hear a democrat say that they don't really worry about the Constitution, I cringe. When I hear a republican claim, regarding any issue, he isn't sure it is constitutional, I have the same response.

What do you mean you're not sure? Aren't you guys charged with upholding it? It either is or isn't! Look it up. It's not hard. I was able to do it. Read what the founders had to say.

Our history is replete with quotes regarding the Constitution, far too many to cover in this article.

So for the sake of all mentioned above, why don't we look back at some of those who had a hand in the original process.
Let's start with James Jackson of the first Congress. He said, "We must confine ourselves to the powers described in the Constitution and the moment we pass it, we take an arbitrary stride towards a despotic government."

Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1801, "A wise and frugal government…shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government."

What! Regulate ourselves? Is it possible that just maybe we could do a better job than our government?

It's astonishing how far we've strayed from those concepts. It is, however, easy to understand how it happened. Ben Franklin understood it just fine when he explained, "When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." Boy, how right he was.

But, as has been said on many occasions, the Constitution & the founders promoted slavery. Why should we listen to them? Well, the founders were very wise men and they knew that the issue would be addressed, which it was.

The founding documents must be looked at, on this issue, as promissory notes. They would put us on the right path toward that goal. Let's see what some of them had to say on the subject.

Patrick Henry in 1773 wrote, "I believe a time will come when an opportunity will be offered to abolish this lamentable evil." (No, he wasn't speaking of Harry Reid, although Reid may have been his contemporary).

In 1786 George Washington wrote, "There is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it."
Ben Franklin was an outspoken abolitionist.

Please pick up a copy of the Constitution and read it. It's not that difficult to comprehend.
The second amendment, for instance, is quite simple, but it's made to seem complicated by anti-gun activists. By the way, it has nothing at all to do with hunting.

George Washington plainly said, "Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' teeth." Thomas Jefferson wrote," No free men shall ever be debarred the use of arms."

Patrick Henry, "The great object is, that every man be armed… Everyone who is able may have a gun."

The tenth amendment is an easy one. It's been at the center of many a debate recently. It's the whole states' rights thing. James Madison (the guy who wrote the Constitution) probably had a good handle on what it meant when he said, "The government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are general." So, for example, if the wackos in California or Colorado want to legalize marijuana, let them. It's none of the federal governments business.

My personal favorite: the separation of church & state. Anyone who can read knows this is not in the Constitution. If you can find it, that would be news to George Washington who said, "It is impossible to govern a nation without God or the Bible."

I could continue for page after page, but in closing I'll leave you with one last quote from Thomas Jefferson in 1823. He wrote, "On every question of construction [of the Constitution], let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or inventing against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."

So the next time you hear the words, "Original Intent," that is what is meant.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/or...sSOy4vyHdD6.99

Unexpected Suggestions for
Constitutional Changes

by Phyllis Schlafly

April 30, 2014

It looks like all sorts of people are joining the game of rewriting parts of the U.S. Constitution. It started with state legislators who apparently had time on their hands, and now it’s even extended to U.S. Supreme Court Justices.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg made a joint appearance at the National Press Club and added their two bits worth of advice about changing our Constitution. Justice Scalia said he would like an amendment to make it easier to pass more amendments, which probably is music to the ears of those who are trying to pass several or even a dozen new amendments. Currently it’s considered to be a laborious process even to get a constitutional amendment introduced, much less passed and ratified.
However, Justice Scalia added a caveat to his suggestion, saying “I certainly would not want a constitutional convention. Whoa! Who knows what would come out of it?”
As Hamlet bemoaned, “Aye, there’s the rub.” Any new constitutional convention, called as allowed by Article V, would surely attract and include political activists with motives and goals diametrically different from those of Justice Scalia.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg then weighed in with the tiresome complaint of the feminists. Her first choice for a constitutional change, she said, would be the addition of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA).
The American people, the mainstream media, and state legislators spent ten years (1972 to 1982) considering the proposed Equal Rights Amendment. They then let it die after it failed to get the three-fourths (3 of the states that are needed to ratify a new amendment.
ERA was marketed as something that would give new rights (with the false promise of a pay raise) to American women (whom the feminists falsely claim are oppressed by the patriarchy), but that phony sales talk failed. Since the text of ERA doesn’t use the words “women” or “gender,” but instead calls for “equality of rights … on account of sex,” it is now beyond dispute that ERA’s principal effect would be to make it unconstitutional to deny a marriage license “on account of sex.”
Our biggest trouble about constitutional revisionism comes from 93-year-old Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who just emerged from retirement to try to make himself relevant again. He has just written a new book calling for six amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

Stevens’ most dangerous suggestion is to gut the Second Amendment. Stevens wants to reverse the Supreme Court decision that upheld our right to keep a gun at home for self-protection.
The fundamental right of Americans to own guns was considered by our Founders to be basic to a free society, and abolishing this right has long been a major goal of the liberals who oppose the conservative values at the heart of our nation. Our right to own a gun is not only necessary for personal self-defense, but it’s fundamental to preventing a takeover by a dictatorship, as we have watched happen in so many other countries.
If Congress acquiesces in the states’ petitions to call an Article V convention, you can bet that rewriting the Second Amendment to allow gun control and to forbid private ownership of guns will be a top priority of many delegates. Would they succeed?
Justice Stevens’ plan to achieve his goal is deceptively simple; he just calls for adding five itty-bitty words: “when serving in the militia.” That sounds so innocuous, but it would wipe out individual Americans’ right to own a gun unless actually serving in the militia, and that would be a dramatic takeaway of our current Second Amendment right to own guns for personal self-defense.
Now consider the usual confusion and pandemonium at a national political convention. Consider how quickly one pre-selected and coached delegate could make the motion to adopt those five little words, and the chairman with the gavel could say, “All those in favor say aye, motion carried, the change is adopted,” and bang goes the gavel. Amid the usual convention noise, most delegates would be unaware of what was happening.
It is likely that most of those who are supporting the calling of an Article V convention have never been to a noisy, controversial national political convention. But that is the way it is. If you need proof, watch the video of how the 2012 Democratic convention chairman in Charlotte illegally gaveled through a motion concerning the elimination of God in the Democrats’ Platform.
It’s amazing how some foolish Republicans are working overtime to give the liberals the opportunity and the power to do so much damage to our great U.S. Constitution.

http://www.eagleforum.org/publicatio...l-changes.html

"It’s amazing how some foolish Republicans are working overtime to give the liberals the opportunity and the power to do so much damage to our great U.S. Constitution."

Yes it is and what does that tell us???

Constitution 101: The Limited Nature of the Federal Government


Constitution 101: The Limited Nature of the Federal Government

To understand the extent of federal power, we must first understand generally what type of government the Constitution created.
During the Philadelphia Convention, many framers favored a strong national government. In fact, James Madison even proposed a federal veto on state laws. But as the convention wore on, delegates voted down proposals to create a centralized government one by one. The Constitution that emerged from the Convention created a federal government with a few, defined, enumerated powers.

The Philadelphia Convention reveals much about the intent of the framers, but we find the true meaning of the Constitution in the ratification process. The people of states elected representatives to approve or reject the document. The debates in the state conventions illuminate the understanding of the Constitution at the time. In a letter to Henry Lee dated June 1824, Madison affirms this view of constitutional interpretation.

I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone it is the legitimate Constitution. And if that be not the guide in expounding it, there can be no security for a consistent and stable, more than for a faithful exercise of its powers.

Many Americans misconstrue the ratification debates, assuming that those favoring the Constitution (the federalists) advocated for a strong, central government, while opponents (anti-federalists) wanted a weaker general government. In fact, virtually everybody agreed that the Constitution was intended to create a limited federal authority, leaving most power to the states. The debate revolved around whether the Constitution, as written, would create such a government. The federalists insisted that it would, while anti-federalist expressed deep fear that it would not.

Published in New York newspapers, the Federalist Papers laid out key federalist arguments and give us a strong sense of how proponents “sold” the Constitution. Madison made the clearest case for the Constitution’s limited nature in Federalist 45.

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce; with which the last the power of taxation will for the most part be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.

While the Federalist Papers shed valuable light on arguments used to “sell” the Constitution to the people, the records of the ratification debates prove even more important and illuminating. Without exception, these debates record supporters arguing vehemently that anti-federalist fears of a powerful national government were unfounded. It was on this basis that the Constitution was ratified. Had the people believed the federal government would morph into the all-powerful entity we see today, they would have soundly rejected its ratification.

In fact, several state ratification documents make clear delegates believed they were approving a federal government with few, defined powers. Consider the New York ratification document.

We, the delegates of the people of the state of New York…Do declare and make known…That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness; that every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the government thereof, remains to the people of the several states, or to their respective state governments, to whom they may have granted the same.

St. George Tucker summed up how to view federal power in View of the Constitution of the United States, the first extended, systematic commentary on the Constitution published after ratification.

The powers delegated to the federal government, are, in all cases, to receive the most strict construction that the instrument will bear, where the rights of a state or of the people, either collectively or individually, may be drawn in question.

So, when considering federal power today, we should always begin with the premise that it was meant to remain limited.

About the author
Michael Maharrey [send him email] is the Communications Director for the Tenth Amendment Center. He proudly resides in the original home of the Principles of '98 - Kentucky. See his blog archive here and his article archive here. He is the author of the book, Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You can visit his personal website at MichaelMaharrey.com and like him on Facebook HERE

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014.../#.U3Eaki9qP5Y




Constitution101: The Sovereignty of the People


Constitution101: The Sovereignty of the People


This is the second article in a series on basic constitutional principles. Read last week’s article HERE.

The federal government acts like it stands as sovereign in the American system, but that was never intended by those who created it. In fact, the federal government was never meant to serve as anything more than an agent, exercising the specific powers delegated by the true sovereign – the people.

While many Americans assume the federal government sits at the top of the power pyramid, it actually belongs on the bottom. Under the intended constitutional system, “we the people” hold the top position of authority, with the states under them and the federal government only supreme within the limited scope of the explicit powers delegate to it.

The very first words of the Constitution make this clear.
Have you ever wondered why these three words appear in large, ornate letters? When an 18^th century British king issued a grant, his name always appeared at the top in the same fashion. The framers merely replaced the king’s name with “We the People,” signifying the sovereign authority from which the delegation of power flowed. (1)

So, the ultimate and final authority always remains in the people. But the states also hold an important position in the American system.
Before the Constitution was drafted and ratified, the sovereign American people had already organized into independent political societies. The people delegated powers to their colonial/state governments, and each was considered an autonomous, sovereign political unit. The British Crown recognized them as such in the Treaty of Paris ending the Revolution.

…the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states, that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.

The Constitution created a “more perfect union” of the states, but it did not alter the fundamental nature of those political societies. In essence, the people of the states took some powers out of the “pot of power” already delegated to their state governments and shifted that authority to the federal government.

The states preceded the union. In fact, they created it. A marriage doesn’t spawn a bride and groom. A bride and groom join together to form a marriage – a union. And when two people get married, their union does not erase their individual character. They don’t become one indistinguishable blob.

The states remain sovereign political societies, only subject to the federal government within the sphere of power delegated.
Article VII established that, “The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.”

The creation of the union did not bind any non-ratifying state to it, even at the point those states ratifying included a majority of America’s population. When the U.S. Congress first convened under the current Constitution, North Carolina and Rhode Island were not represented. In fact, Rhode Island did not join the union for over one year, and remained a sovereign nation up until it ratified on May 29, 1790. Need proof? North Carolina and Rhode Island sent no representatives or Senators to Congress until ratification was finalized in those two states.

This dismantles the notion advanced by many progressives insisting that the framers intended a single national government created by the consent of a plurality of Americans. If that was true, North Carolina and Rhode Island would have automatically been bound to the Union, because at that point, far more than two-thirds of the American people were represented by ratifying states.

This distinction becomes important when considering the “place” the states hold within the American political system.
I’ll dig deeper into the distinction between a national conception of the United States and the union of states intended by the framers and ratifiers in next week’s edition of Constitution 101.

Notes
1. Robert G. Natelson, The Original Constitution: What it Actually Meant and Said, (Los Angeles: Tenth Amendment Center, 2010), 43.


About the author
Michael Maharrey [send him email] is the Communications Director for the Tenth Amendment Center. He proudly resides in the original home of the Principles of '98 - Kentucky. See his blog archive here and his article archive here. He is the author of the book, Our Last Hope: Rediscovering the Lost Path to Liberty. You can visit his personal website at MichaelMaharrey.com and like him on Facebook HERE

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014...9#.U3EZpy9qP5Y