Posted on 03/01/2016 3:17:55 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past
Donald Trump's affection for the Mussolini statement, "It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep." reveals a mindset very much at odds with the Framers of our U.S. Constitution.
To the Framers, power was something they wanted to minimize, in every government office and officeholder.
Patrick Henry said, "Power is the great evil with which we are contending. We have divided power between three branches of government and erected checks and balances to prevent abuse of power.
Thomas Jefferson worried about abuse of power in the Judicial Branch. He said, ""The judiciary of the United States is the subtle corps of sappers and miners constantly working under ground to undermine the foundations of our confederated fabric. They are construing our constitution from a co-ordination of a general and special government to a general and supreme one alone."
Jefferson saw the role of the President as being administrator of the Constitution, a Constitution belonging to the people and in accord with its original meaning. He said, "The Constitution on which our Union rests, shall be administered by me [as President] according to the safe and honest meaning contemplated by the plain understanding of the people of the United States at the time of its adoption -- a meaning to be found in the explanations of those who advocated, not those who opposed it, and who opposed it merely lest the construction should be applied which they denounced as possible."
Thomas Paine worried about executive power when he wrote the pamphlet, "Common Sense." He said, "But where says some is the king of America? I'll tell you Friend, he reigns above, and doth not make havoc of mankind like the Royal of Britain. Yet that we may not appear to be defective even in earthly honors, let a day be solemnly set apart for proclaiming the charter; let it be brought forth placed on the divine law, the word of God; let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarchy, that in America the law is king. For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other. But lest any ill use should afterwards arise, let the crown at the conclusion of the ceremony be demolished, and scattered among the people whose right it is. "
Samuel Adams noted his distaste for a strongman lion leader when, after all the delegates signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776, he said: "We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom all men ought to be obedient. He reigns in Heaven and from the rising to the setting of the sun, let His Kingdom come."
The Declaration itself was a detailed list of grievances against a lion leader. A portion of that sentiment was this: "The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."
After listing their grievances they stated this: "We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown..."
Instead of a strongman, the Founders of this Nation considered the only hands in which our liberty was safe were the Hands of God. As Jefferson said, "Can the liberties of a nation be sure when we remove their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people, that these liberties are the gift of God?"
They believed that our Nation was blessed, not because of its own goodness, but because of God's grace and our dependence on Him. Benjamin Franklin: said “The longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?”
Notice the lack of self pride and arrogance in these men? They were students of history and deep thinkers. They understood the danger of power in the hands of corruptible men. They believed that power and glory belonged to the Creator, not the President.
Mr Trump, being the self proclaimed good Christian that he is, ought to know, the Bible teaches pride comes before destruction; humility comes before honor; that it is better for another to tout your accomplishments, rather than brag about yourself; that God commands we humble ourselves before Him; that it is His greatness and honor and glory we should seek, not our own; that God will bless the meek and punish the proud and defiant; that vengeance belongs to God, not to Donald Trump.
Right and wrong are not the flip side of winning and losing. Mussolini's lion like power was an evil power. Right and wrong are revealed in the understand of the difference between good and evil. That sort of wisdom is understood over time, by a careful self examination and effort to inform ones conscience, preferably with wisdom from above shown through the light of history. People who show signs of possessing that wisdom do not dwell on their own greatness, but they are able and willing to admit when they are wrong.
God is the only one who can make America great again. Unless we "restore the Sovereign to whom all men ought to be obedient" it will never happen.
Mr. Trump, maybe you have been reading the wrong experts.
I have yet to see a concise definition of “personal attack” from the powers here. So, I default to the most sinple in what I believe it is.
Anything like “You are a ______” is a personal attack.
Contrast to...
“What you said about ______ is wrong, because _______ “
fwiw
I like how you conveniently ignore the quotes from our Founders who describe the blowhard Trump very accurately
Wrong.
I never said I was an expert on Churchill. But to put Trump in his league is comical.
True, Churchill stepped up when his country needed him. As for Trump, perhaps someday we’ll know his true intentions.
Sigh - tell your kid’s Kindergarten teacher to keep on teaching that winning is for losers and being a man means licking the boots of women - except for the fact that there’s no real difference between men and women - your disdain of his statement of being a lion as preferable to being a sheep shows that you have bought into it all anyway .... Baaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Many, many of us did not get use to Obama nor will we get use to Trump.
Another lying phony fraud has been busted. You and whoever the too timid “and various others” are to step forward.
+1
“What you said about ______ is wrong, because _______ “
Has been tried many times, all in vain. At some point in time these attempts are eventually abandoned. Especially when examples as you provided are met with nasty retorts impugning either Trump, which indirectly includes supporters as well, or just the person they are responding to.
In addition constant repetition of the same old tired arguments will also bring out a more combative response, again, because civility has seen no positive results.
Just because you think the quotes describe him doesn’t mean it does, now does it.
Interesting. So tell us... what part of the Constitution should be suspended until that nightmare is cleaned up? More specifically.. which rights do you agree to surrender?
"Give me liberty or give me death." - Patrick Henry
"'I only regret, that I have but one life to lose for my country." - Nathan Hale
They did choose to live and die as lions and not sheep.
Your boneheaded attempt to use a Roman quote favored by Mussolini to make Trump incompatible with our Founding Fathers is a desperate stretch that pathetically fails on all points.
George Soros, Warren Buffett and Tom Steyer have also accomplished much in business. Would you believe they'd also make great presidents, based on that criteria?
One of my favorite sayings is, “Better is the enemy of good enough!”. The fact that is is attributed first to Vladimir Lenin, translated from Russian of course, doesn’t change its validity, or make me a Communist for liking it.
They are stock jobbers. They never DID anything.
Perhaps so.
But the basis of the comment was “accomplished much.”
“...which rights do you agree to surrender?”
What rights will remain after Amnesty and a One-Party DEMOCRAT RUN country?
No different than WW2...if we lost then, our Constitution wouldn’t be very useful, no different.
Good post, FRiend.
You didn’t answer my question. YOU said “we’ll get back to the Constitution after...”
So here it is again...
Which Constitutional rights do you agree to surrender?
You have my answer. Read it again and DEAL WITH IT.
I don’t know how you can say the two names in the same sentence. They are 180 degrees opposite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.