Thread: Glenn Beck gets it wrong, wants to rewrite our Constitution!

stevetheroofer wrote,

Damn! you two should be on Beck's research staff!
I'm a drink this here beer, hell don't stop now!

Well Hell's bells stevetheroofer, jump right in, and don't be selfish,...pass me one those PBRs,..I think I might need it.

Johnwk wrote,

In regard to Beck, let me say he done more to awaken the American people than anyone else I know! But his research staff need to do a little research on our Constitution’s original tax plan as our founding fathers intended it to operate.

I agree, he has done much, as has Rush and others leading up to this giant. Looking back it seems as it has taken the media, and their giants a while to get here. Perhaps, in part, that is why I am so critical of many in the media, including Beck. Then there is a part that is suspicious and believes that too much praise of a public figure helps to conceal deceit in clever manners.

So to beat a giant over the head, or poke him in the eye, may sound a bit arrogant, yet it can help to keep him on his toes. With the medias I believe it is the opium of the masses and that clever manipulation goes a long ways in buying time.

Something to add from Webster,

"There is a spirit, which, like the father of evil is constantly "walking to and fro about the earth, seeking whom it may devour:" it is the spirit of FALSE PHILANTHROPY. The persons whom it possesses do not indeed throw themselves into the flames, but they are employed in lighting up the torches of discord throughout the community. Their first principle of action is to leave their own affairs, and neglect their own duties, to regulate the affairs and duties of others. Theirs is the task to feed the hungry, and clothe the naked, of other lands, while they thrust the naked, famished, and shivering beggar from their own doors; to instruct the heathen, while their own children want the bread of life. When this spirit infuses into the bosom of a statesman, (if one so possessed can be called a statesman,) it converts him at once into a visionary enthusiast. Then it is that he indulges in golden dreams of national greatness and prosperity. He discovers that "liberty is power," and not content with vast schemes of improvement at home, which it would bankrupt the treasury of the world to execute, he flies to foreign lands to fulfill obligations to "the human race" by inculcating the principles of "political and religious liberty," and promoting the "general welfare" of the whole human race."

This I believe fits into the thread.

Originally Posted by Justthefacts

"Perhaps all that is needed is for someone to send Beck a copy of the Constitution? "

I think Beck knows more about the constitution than any average 10k Americans

Anyone want to bet?

I have to agree. I have heard so much crap from people "thats unconstitutional", your invading my "constitutional rights" and such other nonsense and in 95% of the time being someone who has studied the constitution, studied from ancient history to mid US history there is nothing to back their claims. Its just become the idiots excuse "its unconstitutional" or "my constitutional rights".

Politicians these days and judges don't even understand the founding principles of the US Constitution for a large portion. Many of these arguements they make are simply unfit.

Such as the 14th amendment grants citizenship to ALL us born babies be them from illegal or citizen.

However study the framework and there are ONLY 2 possible choices depending on constitutional points of view.

1. The Constitution never really addressed the issue of illegal aliens as they were unforseen to be a major problem.

or the better arguement:

2. The US Constitution was deigned for the rights of the citizen. The 14th amendment was simply to grant citizenship to former slaves who were not considered citizens while denying citizenship to foreign nationals who are either here legally as such like an ambassador or illegals who fall outside US Jurisdiction as being unknown and hidden in the underground. If it meant citizenship to any it would have left out the entire bit about being under US Jurisdiction as we cannot think of any other use for that line other then the specifically set aside foreign diplomats and ambassadors.

Syanis wrote,

Politicians these days and judges don't even understand the founding principles of the US Constitution for a large portion. Many of these arguements they make are simply unfit.

I believe you may be giving these folks a bit too much credit. There is a insidious odor that reeks of tyranny, or at least perhaps to myself. Their understanding is not the problem, if they were to be honest in their interpretation of the Constitution, they are however moved by what Webster would call "pecuniary dependence on the federal government." The chains that bind such men, can be chains of selfish interests. The chains that they willingly bear will weigh on the rest of society as they hold positions of power and influence. For their own interests and the interests of friends, they are willing to sell away the freedoms and liberties of others and mask it in the name of progress, and for the greater good. Webster talks about those that "will spring up those low, grovelling, base and selfish feelings which bind men to the footstools of a despot by bonds as strong and enduring as those which attach them to free institutions."

The whole idea is to look controversial or stupid, after all that is better than to be judged tyrannical, or a despot.

Of course I might just be a radical..............

The outline in the beginning of the thread concerning taxes would have done much to avoid so many controversies in the first place, yet refer back to Webster and the "footstool of a despot" and that could help to explain many problems. JMO

"Sir, there have existed, in every age and every country, two distinct orders of men--the lovers of freedom, and the devoted advocates of power." Daniel Webster

Originally Posted by roundabout

Well Hell's bells stevetheroofer, jump right in,

I just do the heavy lifting gig, it surprised the people who love me when they realized I could read, and reading you guys debate the constitution is pretty darn cool, even a roofer can understand (more than half of what's being said here) I will say this though PBR well this is America so it's totally within your constitutional rights Thanks you guys, guess I should've paid more attention to "School House Rock" instead of turning it to Bugs Bunny!

stevetheroofer wrote,

I just do the heavy lifting gig, it surprised the people who love me when they realized I could read, and reading you guys debate the constitution is pretty darn cool, even a roofer can understand (more than half of what's being said here) I will say this though PBR well this is America so it's totally within your constitutional rights Very Happy Thanks you guys, guess I should've paid more attention to "School House Rock" instead of turning it to Bugs Bunny!

Yea stevetheroofer, I watched Bugs Bunny too! I got me one of those grade school "edumacations." But, even with that, the Constitution was written so that the common man could understand it. Beware of those high faluten folks with their PHDs (Piled Higher and Deeper) trying to hijack the meanings with twisting and emotional spinning techniques.

and,

Johnwk wrote,

Many years ago I was listening to Jefferson one evening and he told me: "On every question of construction [of the Constitution], 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 invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed."--Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, June 12, 1823, The Complete Jefferson, p. 322.

Here you can see that Johnwk just opens up his ears and listens to Jefferson.

Johnwk places emphasis on documentation,....reading the thoughts of those who wrote the Constitution and the spirit in the debate.

One needs to understand historical context. For this I would add that these men understood the writings of others before them, The Bible and its teachings, and natural law through the understanding of the nature of man. The nature of man should come naturally to each of us and is traced back to the gift God gave man, "free will." Free will is what stirred Martin Luther to write his thesis and usher in the great debates and the Reformation of the Church back in 1526(?) or so. Our founders understood the debate.

The point is that understanding the Constitution need not be rocket science. As Airborn has pointed out in other threads K.I.S.S., Keep It Simple Stupid.

and,

Johnwk wrote,
[quote]Bottom line is, expounding upon our Constitution is not a matter of “interpretationâ€