"The Real Constitution, and its real enemies" Rectifying the attack on our Constitution

FreeRepublic Book Club ^ | 1/22/2022 | Steven Maikoski, Author

[Loud Mime]

From the Book:

"The Democrats are fundamentally transforming our nation by using a plan that is so clever that the conservatives do not recognize their compliance with the poisonous design.

Their tactic is brilliant. They have us arguing over the political left and right, conservative versus liberal, tolerance, intolerance, rights, race, civil rights or privileges, benefits and fairness while they engage in a continual drone that we are a democracy instead of a republic. The bickering has directed our attention to party politics instead of working from our constitutional foundation, which is allowing our government’s decay into fascism, communism, or something worse.

Their narrative is the foundation of all the non-constitutional political challenges and changes in the United States. It is how they have “sold” the unknowing citizens on their twisted politics.

To correct this course we must face three facts about today’s political dialogue.

First, we must focus on the fact that our republic is defined by our Constitution. It is the foundation of all law; therefore, our Constitution is properly the foundation, the starting point, of all political measurements. We then use that foundation to support our arguments for the proper operation of the federal government.

Second, the narrative that there is a political left and right is based on the Democrat’s plan to avoid referencing our constitutional foundation. This must stop now! A person either supports our Constitution or they do not. So, we have constitutional centrists or leftists as our political groups; that’s it! There is no right wing, because the constitutionists are the center (you cannot be an extremist if you are in the center). But there is a left group desiring great changes from our constitutional form of government and an extreme left desiring our government’s overthrow. Within that left group you have many ideologies, including fascists, communists, elitists, aristocrats and other political 
opportunists."

End Excerpt

Using the Constitution as the initial point in political arguments thwarts the best arguments of the fascist-democrats. They do not know how to reply to the assertions that they have perverted our entire system because this system reveals them for what they are!

Amazon Link

[Loud Mime]

Look through all the books in politics today. They offer lessons on our history and issue complaints about the political competition, usually written by rich newsmen and political personalities, yet they never focus on the real problem and offer a solution. This book does both, and does it in less than 100 pages.

[Loud Mime]

I must say that this system works against the worst of the fascist-democrats. They don’t know how to respond. There is more information at the Amazon site, or you can freepmail me with any non-public questions.

God Bless America!

[Loud Mime]

PING!

[gattaca]

Thanks for posting this.

[nathanbedford]

Using the Constitution as the initial point in political arguments thwarts the best arguments of the fascist-democrats. They do not know how to reply to the assertions that they have perverted our entire system because this system reveals them for what they are!

As one who has for years defined himself as a constitutional conservative, I welcome the idea that all national policy must be grounded in the Constitution and say that which is not authorized by the Constitution is repugnant to the Constitution.

That said, it occurs that the left is indisputably very much in the " know [about] how to reply to the assertions that they have converted our entire system…" Anyone who thinks the left is at a loss for words to justify their undermining of our Constitution and our political system in general, is uninformed about critical theory. And equally uninformed about how that theory dominates our public discourse.

The question of being bound to the Constitution is a matter of jocular dismissal in our great universities whose faculties have substituted an entire new epistemology that has not only infected their students but has metastasized broadly throughout the land and infected every single American institution.

The proof? American cities were burning down but the reportage was turned upside down by the media. Our largest corporations subsidized the burning. Constitution? The question never comes up!

Critical theory and its spawns such as critical race theory and "equity," have won the day and we constitutional conservatives are on our back feet and about to lose our country.

Yes, we should return with fidelity to the Constitution but I regrettably doubt if exhortations alone to do so will have much effect. We must find a way to counter the cult of critical theory that actually changes minds and wins where it counts.

[rrrod]

Great article. Thanks.

[BiglyCommentary]

The US Constitution starts out with “WE THE PEOPLE...”.

IF YOU ARE ON THE SIDE OF FREEDOM AND THE PEOPLE, YOU ARE ON THE RIGHT SIDE. IT MATTERS NOT WHO ELSE IS ALSO ON YOUR SIDE.

Reagan, Trump get it.

[Loud Mime]

The preamble was added on my Gouverneur Morris; never voted on. It is outside of the Articles and Sections of the Constitution.

Measurements have a starting point, be they in land surveys, construction projects or accounting.

As a Constitutionist, we are the center, the foundation. The fascist-democrats are far left.

[Loud Mime]

I have changed the foundation of their argument; give it a try.

[BiglyCommentary]

What was the purpose of the Preamble?

To me, the starting pojnt is the why we are doing something. Why are we doing a land survey or a construction project...

[Loud Mime]

After the constitution was finished it was given to Gouverneur Morris for finalizing. He took a couple of days to cut down the number of articles and sections, clean up the wording and added the preamble.

I read somewhere that part of the origination of the preamble was credited to James Wilson.

I bring up land surveys and such because the Democrats have floated the initial point in our political system, causing great problems in politics. If they did the same thing in construction and surveying, you could lose your house. We need to get serious about the Constitution being the foundation, the initial point, of all political and legal measurements.

[Jim Noble]

instead of working from our constitutional foundation

The Constitution is finished. Stop obsessing about it and figure out where we go next.

[Loud Mime]

I disagree. There’s a lot of people here who will fight for it.

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” Sam Adams

[Jim Noble]

There’s a lot of people here who will fight for it

Fine, fight for it all you want, but it only can work if, not a majority, but 90+% of the people are willing to live peaceably under it, and this is not the case. It really hasn't been the case for 90 years.

How will your "fight" make those unwilling to live within the limits set by the 1788 Constitution stop their broad front, multi-sector destruction of it?

It won't, that's how.

[amihow]

The Constitution is finished. Stop obsessing about it and figure out where we go next.
............
I strongly disagree. The Constitution is under attack, but not finished.

If you were correct, no remnant of the rule of law would have survived. But we still have people in this country who believe in and respect the rule of law.

We need to re-educate people on the power and wisdom of our Constitution.
Explaining the pledge to the young ones, who rarely say it, much less understand it , will be a small start.

[Loud Mime]

Well said!

[Loud Mime]

Check out the ratings at the Amazon link. All are five stars!

[Publius]

Federalist/Anti-Federalist ping.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

The phrase "the US is a republic not a democracy" is a non sequitur. As far as what our forefathers wanted for us we are a representative democracy as opposed to a direct democracy, and rather than the people being governed entirely at the national level, our government is distributed among the states as well.

As far as what is actually the case we are an oligarchy masquerading as a degenerate form of democracy.

Liberals obey the Constitution just as conservatives do, only they just have a different interpretation. This is no different than the many Christian sects who all adhere to biblical teaching yet somehow come to very different conclusions about how to worship God and live their lives.

Even conservatives are squishy about the Constitution especially when it comes to suspending parts of it during wartime, giving more power to the Feds when its about "being tough on crime", and when they advocate for standardizing state regulations to make it easier for multinationals to expand across the US.

Regardless of what governance should come from DC and what from our state capitols, the increasing funding of state and local budgets from DC leads us ever forward to centralized power. The Dems have defunded police locally. The uniparty will eventually refund them from US taxes. We will then have a nationalized police force.

Rather than arguing over the correct interpretation of the Constitution, we need cities and states to become financially self-sufficient so that they can regain some of their lost autonomy. This might mean higher local and state taxes in the short run but hopefully lower fed taxes in the long term. It's sad that it's come down to "show me the money" but money talks and BS interpretations of our founding documents walks.

[joe fonebone]

And this explains perfectly why I no longer call myself a republiCAN’T.
The constitution.
It’s not a liberal document.
It’s not a conservative document.
It’s designed to piss everyone off.
Kinda keeps you on your toes.

I piss off liberals.
I piss off conservatives.
I am what you call a strict constitutionalist.

How can you tell if someone is not a strict constitutionalist?
If they have ever said, There ought to be a law....