Issue Position: The CONstitution

Issue Position

The Constitution is a magnificent document. Right up there with Plato's Republic in the amount of intricate detail, and forethought that went into the planning of a government. A group of men, gathered to form a government, in which the rights of mankind, at least Americans, would be preserved by a government dedicated to the preservation of their human rights. Unfortunately, human rights then meant something far different from what it means today [Orwell was right. Newspeak. Socialists adopt the words of the free to meet their definitions, and have done so successfully. And the meaning of these words frequently ends up meaning the opposite of what the term was originally meant.]

The Framers did this by 1) spelling out explicitly what the duties of the new government would be, 2) that the federal government was subservient to the people and the respective States, except for a few designated and well defined areas, and 3) they pitted three branches of government against one another, with neither having authority over the other. It was this last provision that they felt guaranteed the future success of containing tyrannical government power, in that the branches would always be in competition with one another, and not cooperating, that would secure our freedoms. They could not imagine, all three branches of government, collaborating and working hand in hand with each other for very long. Boy were they ever wrong!

The Framers also felt that a well educated populace of good citizens would ensure at the polls, in the courtrooms and the halls of government would ensure their own freedoms. [The anti-federalists added the 2nd Amendment to further ensure their freedoms from government tyranny.] They never had public education.

The Constitution spells out the purpose (to safe guard our Rights) and formation of the federal government, and the few duties of that government, and the straightforward limitations of powers of the federal government. These duties are explicitly stated, as are the limitations of the federal government's powers. These limitations are severe.

Contrary to what the black robes state, there is no implied or inherent government powers in the Constitution, and the Tenth Amendment makes this perfectly clear. Tyrannies are perpetrated by judges dishonoring themselves and their oath to defend you and the Constitution, whenever the black robes find some new government power or duty in the Constitution, that are clearly not present. A judges robes are black to hide the fact that they are constantly soiling themselves at the bench by besmirching your liberties.

The Constitution does nothing more, than create and limit the federal government. If you do not like this, you have one of two options: 1) Tough! 2) Amend it.

Unfortunately, the branches of the federal government exercise a third option. They ignore the Constitution, they ignore ANY limitation on their powers or desires, and they LIE, and enforce that lie ultimately with the point of a gun. They have successfully done this since the Constitution's inception (see the Whiskey Rebellion), and were emboldened by the Civil War (which arguably killed off federalism), and since the empire building of the McKinley administration of the 1890's have progressively seen the Constitution and Congressionally passed laws being faithfully followed by government ONLY when it was convenient to government.

This is why I refer to the Constitution as the CONstitution. The Framing Fathers may have been honorable men, who were trying to create a government that would protect our liberties and do nothing else, but in practice they unintentionally created the government that would eventually subjugate us.

The Bill of Rights (the first ten Amendments) was added because the aristocratic guys who wrote the Constitution (the Federalists), could not convince enough people (the anti-Federalists) that they had not written the chains that would eventually enslave Americans. Indeed, NONE of the people who signed the Declaration of Independence, would sign onto or attend the Constitutional Convention. They saw it as a betrayal of the Revolution they had just successfully fought to cast out a government, and vehemently boycotted the effort. They wished to remain free.

These Amendments explicitly spelled out areas where Congress, would have NO power to legislate. The Amendments declared certain areas to be Rights (God given or natural rights) that superseded government . They further declared that just because we spelled out some of our Rights, does not mean we do not have a bunch more undeclared Rights (at the suggestion of federalist Hamilton). Further, they declared that any duty or power NOT explicitly contained in the Constitution, was reserved by either the States or The People.

A Right supersedes government power. Even if an Amendment were repealed, or even substituted with an Amendment now prohibiting or infringing upon a Right, we would still have that Right. This is because a Right cannot ever be taken away. It is our Right as human beings, and government (or even a majority of voters) lacks the power to interfere in, nor to diminish a Right.

This is not some fringe idea, or crackpot theory. You can read this in the writings of both the federalists and the anti-federalists at the time of the Constitution's writing (who were inspired by John Locke). Rights MUST be natural or God given. Because if Rights do not come from above government, then they come from government. And anything government grants, government can take away (and frequently does when it becomes inconvenient). Therefore a Right must come from somewhere superior to government. And these Rights do, they come from the act of just being born human.

.... WE hold these Truths to be self‑evident (obvious), that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable (cannot be taken away) Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness (acquiring property) ‑‑ That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving (given) their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed (people), that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.... -- the Declaration of Independence (sic)

That is the meaning of human rights. Not, that you are entitled to government provided housing, health care, retirement, income, food and water, and all the other crap socialists would like you to swallow. But you are entitled to the human right of your life, your liberty and the right to pursue happiness (which was the Founder's idea of freely pursuing your motivations and desires, as well as accumulating material wealth, that is land, goods and services, which makes life enjoyable). Interacting in a peaceful, mutually agreeable fashion with your fellow humans (part of your liberty) was also considered your right, and necessary for your happiness. Interacting in a non-mutually agreeable manner with your fellow individuals is still a crime.

If every person has the right to defend -- even by force -- his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. -- Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

So live life, well. And without government. Because if we have learned anything, government fails every time it is tried (1 Samuel 8:10-18). No piece of paper can keep your freedoms. Only a gun and the willingness to use it can. So horde ammo, practice your marksmanship, and when you can stand your life no longer, shoot strait.

"How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every police operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive? If during periods of mass arrests people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever was at hand? The organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt."

"If . . . if . . . We didn't love freedom enough. And even more - we had no awareness of the real situation. We spent ourselves in one unrestrained outburst in 1917, and then we hurried to submit. We submitted with pleasure! . . . We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward."

- Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Bring It ON!

Addendums: 1) Two areas of the Constitution the framers made grievous omission on were slavery and the emancipation of women. Emancipation seems not to have even been discussed, nor much of a worry for the framers (in their writings). The only quote I can find is the one of Abigail Adams writing her husband to inform him he had better not forget about the women. I suspect Mr. Adams did not get much marital attention after that.

Slavery [PDF doc link] was discussed, and even included in the Constitution in the future ban on importation of slaves, and counting slaves as 3/5 of a human for the purposes of Representation. And while virtually all Framers were willing to express beliefs that slavery was bad, they were slave owners and apparently did not want to fight their addiction.

Both of these issues were egregious hypocritical slaps in the face of the Land of Liberty.

2) Because our Rights exist at birth (a birth right), a Right can be waived, but never taken away. And you can always immediately reclaim a Right you previously waived. Best advice: Never waive a Right.

The tyranny of the majority, even 100%, cannot vote away your Rights. That is correct, even if everyone but one person agrees to something that clearly violates a Right, the majority cannot prevail. Even if everyone agrees, that Right still exists, and can be reclaimed by those who previously gave up a Right, or by those who either wander into the sphere of influence of those who voted, as well as those subsequently born into this sphere of influence.

This brings us to the last point. The Constitution itself. Is it a contract? If it is, then those who signed it were bound by that contract. But, no one else was. And all the signers are dead, therefore if it was a contract it is now null and void.

If the Constitution was something else, what was it? And why does it bind anyone to its subjugation? Where does its power to do some come from? Ostensibly, "The People," as declared in the Constitution. But as established, a majority, or even all people cannot bind a subsequently unwilling human being to follow the dictates of this document.

The above are fun questions to ponder. But only intellectually. Obviously, where the power comes from to compel your fealty to the Constitution is that nice people will come and punish, or kill you for failing to respect their authority over you. It matters not what you or they claim. In the end it always comes down to guns.

The first place to start is being free, at least in your mind. Once you begin there, the remaining path, as painful as the journey will become, is obvious.

Find out just what the people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.

- Frederick Douglass, civil rights activist, Aug. 4, 1857

Source