Posted on 02/02/2014 10:09:40 AM PST by Jacquerie
Conservatives believe, as did our founding generation, a fundamental truth, a maxim that early on differentiated the US from other republics. The first principle of American political society is that government exists to secure our unalienable rights. Our Declaration eloquently expressed it as, “That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, . . . “
That straightforward concept begat the question, “How to best secure those rights?”
The answer was to be found in some form of republican government. By that, the founding generation meant the peoples’ representatives consent to all laws. That determination was all well and good, but was insufficient, for it left the difficult and decade long task of devising the particulars, the nuts and bolts of how to implement republican, freedom preserving government in thirteen suddenly independent societies that sometimes, (as now) confused republicanism with democracy.
Thirteen societies went their own ways in various grand experiments in self-government. About half continued an English tradition, a bill of rights in or alongside their legislatively adopted constitutions. Not all states were very successful in keeping their eye on the ball, of designing government for the single purpose of securing the unalienable rights of their people. The burdens of war exasperated lofty republican ideals such that some states approached something closer to democratic government than freedom enhancing republics. For instance, one’s wealth wasn’t always secure from tender laws and taxation approaching confiscation. Despots around the civilized world silently cheered as the American experiment appeared certain to founder on the shoals of too much of the democratic element.
With these experiences in mind, our Framers learned enough to design a government in 1787 that did not depend on a bill of rights, but rather one which strove to secure freedom by dividing power. They depended on the structure of their design, which set interests against interests, rather than the parchment barrier of a bill of rights, which they knew from experience to be an unreliable bulwark against tyranny.
Other patriots demanded a formal bill of rights and were rewarded with ten amendments that stated in no uncertain terms our rights to religious and press freedom, to protect ourselves and communities through force of arms, to be secure in our persons, personal papers and other possessions from unreasonable searches, to demand search warrants and grand juries, to not be subject to two trials for the same offense, no self-incrimination nor confiscation of property but for public use in exchange for just compensation, speedy and public trials, impartial juries, counsel for trial defense, no excessive bail nor cruel punishments.
Oh, and because the drafters of these amendments knew they couldn’t possibly list all of our unalienable rights, they determined that the rights they didn’t enumerate could not be denied to the people. To cap it off, the states retained every power they didn’t grant to the government they created. Airtight right?
Look at subsequent history. With the exceptions of quartering troops and defense counsel at trials, none of the first ten amendments are in near full force, and most are, for practical purposes, gone from the American scene. Why did our government drop the ball? When did we forget the singular purpose of government? When did government begin to pick off, one by one, our unalienable rights? When did DC begin to shift focus from securing our rights and toward so-called social justice?
They were trampled by a majoritarian government that beginning in 1913 featured popular elections for members of the Senate.
It began when the lessons of our immediate postcolonial experiences were forgotten or ignored, when the Left sold forgetful Americans the snake oil of democracy. Power to the people! Those stiff, rich and out of touch state appointed senators stand in the way of the people!
Our Framers relied on the structure of the constitution, its vertical and horizontal divisions of power, and not a bill of rights to secure freedom. Today, most people actually equate democracy with freedom. The legitimate purpose of government, to secure our rights was forgotten and replaced with whatever a Leftist majority, and recently minority, thinks it can get away with. Obama won twice, get over it and do as you are told.
Until power is divided once again, until the national government is re-federalized, the DC uniparty will chip away at what little remains of our rights, and our continued descent into the hell of democratic tyranny is assured.
It might be too late. Perhaps the people are too corrupt to care, but that is no excuse for conservatives to not support an Article V state amendment convention to reestablish first principles, and correct the Leftist wrongs in our constitution
Awesome post, Jac. You’re correct that we’ve reached a point where something drastic has to be done to rein in the federal leviathan, and that an Article V convention could go a long way to accomplishing that (in the main).
Personally, I’m a bit further down the road from there. I’ve lost faith that we can get to where we really need to be through our established constitutional system of government. I think we’ve reached a point where words on paper have little impact on the beast.
Our redemption is in our history. If only we can grasp it.
OK, don’t believe me when I say the level of demagoguery will ascend to a level you’ve never seen before. Don’t believe me when I tell you the pressure to ratify a Soviet-style constitution will be irresistible to the spineless chumps we have in government today. Don’t believe me when I tell you it will pass, and then be interpreted in the worst way possible.
I was giving input on a FR thread, and you know you always get what you pay for. I’ll admit it, I don’t know Shineola about the precise mechanics of what’s going to happen. I just know how the individuals involved will perform. Imagine the poorest level you can, then imagine some more and take it a couple notches further down.
This discussion is the the result of a book by a lawyer, and lawyers are perpetually surprised by the outcomes of these things. Have you ever wondered why that is? Because they’re book-smart and street stupid.
You are simply wrong about this. Call me names and rubbish my comments all you want, I don't care.
Damnifino. You figure it out. Enjoy your socialism.
Yes it is, which is why I've said here dozens of times, that the Constitution has been overturned. We must now look to the Declaration for guidance.
You are simply wrong about this. Call me names and rubbish my comments all you want, I don't care.
Friend, I think your hair's on fire.
Three quarters of the state legislatures in this country are not going to abandon all common sense, history, tradition, and their best interests, and vote to radically alter the Constitution in such a way that it becomes the foundation for a new Marxist state.
The representatives attending an Article V convention will go into it knowing that millions of Americans are as terrified of the process and outcome as you are. These people have to return home and face the people of their respective states. I guarantee you, they'll be taking their jobs very seriously, as none of them want to wind up as casualties for attempting something as radical as what you're suggesting.
These lilly-livers are going to abandon every principle they have when it starts. OK, call me FOS, and hair on fire. You trust them? I don't, and you can't convince me otherwise. Let's see.
You said: Three quarters of the state legislatures in this country are not going to abandon all common sense, history, tradition, and their best interests, and vote to radically alter the Constitution in such a way that it becomes the foundation for a new Marxist state.
Yes, they most certainly will. Call me what you will, rubbish my posts, doesn't change a thing. They will if they're convinced not caving totally will cost them their sinecures. You think they'll face hostile constituents if they cave, I disagree because of the demagoguery and propaganda that's about to be unleashed. People will not be demanding they stay with their constitutional principles, they'll be demanding they bring on the Marxism, the faster the better. The "Gibsmedat."
You, my FRiend, are underestimating the competition.
-PJ
I know. Tricky of me, wasn’t it?
;^)
(Don’t mess with old people)
You’ve obviously given up before the battle’s even been engaged, and no, we’re not in the real fight yet. That’s still to come.
Meanwhile, terrified people like yourself, have got themselves so wound up, they can’t see the forest for the trees. Have you also got yourself psyched up and prepared to board the cattle car to the re-education camp? Sounds like it.
Get yourself together, or you’ll be of no use on game day.
-PJ
Naw, Windflier has it. I’m just worried about what these bastards are going to do to us. I’m cynical, always have been, and I always bet for the lowest behavior of politicians. I’ve been around too long, and posted too many 10s of thousands of posts, to be a troll. Just no credibility.
I need to take a rest and lurk for awhile, and see what my betters do. Otherwise I won’t be worth dick on game day.
Just because someone else wants an article V convention, it doesn’t mean they want it for the same reason I do. A heinous, snake-in-the-grass dirtbag like Soros may want one to push all the wrong reasons, and Sarah Palin might want one for all the right reasons, but it doesn’t mean they share any kind of goal.
That said, I agree with you that the environment is a bad one for it.
But if I say that, it begs the question: When is a good time for it?
I agree 100% with your view on the 17th Amendment.
One of the biggest problems I see is an out of control monstrosity of a federal government, and states are helpless against the extortion practiced by the dissemination of the federal highway funds and other such things.
It is impossible for states to have any independence when that kind of money is being thrown around.
We need to find a way to get more power into the hands of the states. We need to abolish things like the Department of Education and let states and local governments determine the best way to deal with things like that.
Never again would anti-10th amendment lawyers have the chance for a seat at the federal bench.
There would at least be the chance the most horrible of Scotus' awful decisions these past 101 years could be overturned.
I will not call you names. Nor do have any animosity toward you. I simply don’t believe there is as much risk to the nation as many fear. There are too many freedom loving states to ratify anything really bad. Is there risk? Of course there is always some risk. Even if we postulate that the risk is not small, what choice do we have? The runaway federal government must be brought to heel. Significant numbers of our leaders knowingly or unknowingly support policies that will destroy us. They are aided by the propaganda media. And neither of these groups care one wit about our constitution. Our course to maintain our republic is to raise the power of the states and reduce the power of the federal government. Sorry I came across so strongly. There is no disrespect intended toward you or others. Some days later I am still irritated about another thread where in the editorialist stated we (conservatives) deserve to loose because of the actions of the pubbie elite. Some of that irritation blead into my reply to you. Again sorry for that.
Windflier summed it up pretty well. I have a lot of fear when something as major as an Article V is contemplated. I don't know if it's "irrational" or not, because it's, well, irrational. Like Pi or the square-root of two. Could be worse, could be unreal, like the square-root of -2, right?
I can't get the picture of Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer rewriting the Constitution that they've been abusing, their entire lives, out of my head. Could you ever eat again if you've ever pictured Rosa DeLauro licking her chops? {shudder!!}
:^)
You are killing me with that picture! Just remember every bridge you cross is somewhere built upon imaginary numbers. I know that thought always gives me comfort when I cross one. NOT! ;D).
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.
