Posted on 04/16/2014 2:47:01 PM PDT by Jacquerie
A common concern among Article V opponents is fear that a convention of the states to propose constitutional amendments will result in an oppressive constitution. All we need to do is enforce the constitution we have. Elect the right people to implement our written constitution and all will be well.
As logical and appealing as that approach appears to be, it ignores some horrible realities, and actually promotes our headlong dive into tyranny, for the anti-constitution, the unwritten Frankenstein constitution rules.
First, aside from the occasional heat politicians take from an outraged populace, our legislative and executive branches in the aggregate do not acknowledge any limitations on their power.
Second, and perhaps worst of all, the branch charged with adjudication of disputes arising under the constitution has rewritten the constitution such that instead of securing our freedoms, their constitution, the Frankenstein constitution, welcomes tyranny.
The United States has two constitutions. Freepers read, study, and revere the brilliance of our framers’ plan of government, and support like-minded politicians. Meanwhile, federal courts, when they adjudicate within any limits at all, are guided by the Frankenstein constitution, the one they and their predecessors amended at least dozens of times these past eighty years.
There is no need to attempt to list here at FreeRepublic all of the illegal judicial amendments that created today’s Frankenstein constitution. Suffice to say that a counter-revolution to the American Revolution has occurred. A compact between We The People, via our states, and the government we created has gone wrong. Rather than secure our rights, the unwritten constitution secures the power of our oppressors. When cases come before Scotus, the starting points are previous, typically unconstitutional decisions, and not the supreme law they swore to uphold.
The executive branch has gleefully swept up powers discarded by congress. In fact, the very first clause of Article I, Section 1, the one in which a free people assigned all legislative authority therein granted to congress, now resides within the executive branch. This authority will pass on to the next president. Unless these powers are formally retrieved, ALL subsequent presidents will have Obama’s unwritten, unconstitutional, despotic powers. That is tyranny which no even year election alone can reverse.
When freepers ignore the reality of the unwritten Frankenstein constitution that is the actual framework of the ruling class, there is little hope for freedom’s restoration. It means we have turned a blind eye to our situation, for elections long ago stopped serving to choose who will faithfully perform their constitutional duties on our behalf. It means the ruling despots have a constitutionally free hand to aggrandize more power and wealth, to continue sapping our liberty. In order to possibly restore republican freedom, we must first come face to face with our enemy, admit the dominance of this Frankenstein constitution and the increasing irrelevancy of the written constitution.
Only the very hard and fast provisions of the written constitution remain. Representatives serve two years, senators six, and for the time being at least, presidents are limited to two four year terms. Nearly every other “soft” clause that has gotten in the way of progressive goals is either gone, misapplied or turned upside down. Think commerce clause, equal protection, taxation, abortion, fag marriage, our Bill of Rights, Obamacare, Common Core . . .
An unwritten Frankenstein constitution rules. If we are to kill this monster and return to republican freedoms, it is way past time, if time remains at all, to grasp a clause from Article V that George Mason demanded at the federal convention of 1787.
Unlike so much of the written constitution, the state amending authority of Article V still exists. We must act while we still have the power to peacefully correct the mistake of the 17th Amendment, thoroughly re-federalize our government with structural amendments, and subsequently reverse the oppression that no election can correct.
thanks, I needed that
V
Anti-Article V ping!
Bravo! Very will written concise explanation of the problem before us.
In the full light of day, the entire population watching.
If I'm understanding, you're proposing rescinding the 17th, perhaps altering/creating others, and NOT a total rewrite (which, imho and given the current bell curve, bodes disaster) ?
Not that I'll likely be alive to see any of it happen . . .
(i think :)
2 peripheral points that I was thinking about today.
1) the politicos and media continue to push the notion of our so-called “dedicated public servants” whenever one of them dies or retires after a lifetime in office. There needs to be push back in the same manner the obama denigrated doctors while trying to pass obamacare.
2) We are a free people. Imposing authoritarianism upon a free people is not the same as imposing it upon a citizenry that is accustomed to being ruled. I am trying to come up with a comparable historical example of authoritarianism being imposed upon a free people, and I cannot. There will be an inevitable breaking point that elections, at this point may delay, but cannot avoid. The appropriate Amendments to the Constitution appear to be the only civil way to change this trajectory.
1) Insurrection, or
2) An Article V convention.
It would be obliging if the Constitutionally-illiterate fearmongers who declaim against a 'runaway' convention, manipulated presumptively by the filth of the statists and the Left, would finally comprehend that the Article V convention can ONLY PROPOSE AMENDMENTS, not ratify them. The ratification process of any set of proposed amendments does NOT change...and the statist filth cannot begin to gain the ratification of their (presumptive) anti-Constitutional amendments in even a simple majority of state legislatures, let alone the required supermajority.
Does anyone doubt for a moment that state legislatures would ratify the repeal of the 17th amendment in a New York taxicab heartbeat minute?
We are, metaphorically, in the position of James Bond in Fleming's novel 'Moonraker', at the start of his bridge game against Hugo Drax, to wit: All To Play For.
Second, and perhaps worst of all, the branch charged with adjudication of disputes arising under the constitution has rewritten the constitution such that instead of securing our freedoms, their constitution, the Frankenstein constitution, welcomes tyranny.
The United States has two constitutions. Freepers read, study, and revere the brilliance of our framers’ plan of government, and support like-minded politicians. Meanwhile, federal courts, when they adjudicate within any limits at all, are guided by the Frankenstein constitution, the one they and their predecessors amended at least dozens of times these past eighty years.
Spot on!
I agree with you however deep down I know the only way to get FedGov™’s complete and undivided attention is to form state infantry divisions and lob artillery shells into one of their forts.
I’m in.
Deal ‘em.
Why do you think we would fair any better in preventing a convention of the states from proposing constitutional amendments that will result in an oppressive constitution than we have in preventing the rise of the anti-constitution, the unwritten Frankenstein constitution?
Why do you think we would prevail in a convention of the states so as to correct the mistake of the 17th Amendment, thoroughly re-federalize our government with structural amendments, and subsequently reverse the oppression that we have already failed to prevent and thus allowed to happen?
When you write “government”, do you mean the structure/organization of the government? I ask because so many people seem to mean the people who occupy positions therein rather than the structure/organization of the government and they are not the same thing.
What do you mean by “structural amendments”?
It did get their undivided attention, but
it didn’t work out so well in the end.
It occurred to me that when conservatives and rats argue over the constitution, they do not debate the same document.
Because the written constitution is nearly gone, there is little to lose when very angry states, prodded by very angry constituents, push back against the DC tyrants.
Indeed!!!
So you agree CSA losing was not good? You are evolving...
Article V ping.
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.