Reflecting upon the Constitution on Constitution Day

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by wkmac, Sep 19, 2010.

  1. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    With Kevin Gutzman

  2. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    Although, I would argue and be open to give and take on behalf of Healthcare, Education, FDA and Retirement.....but he nails it on Foriegn Policy and those who champion the willingness to go beyond the Constitution's intent....
  3. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member


    IMO, everyone on bothsides go beyond the intent of the Constitution. It just depends on your POV as to where and when you are willing to ignore the limitations of power and erase those lines. All sides are guilty as hell!

    Every so often a YouTube vid will appear of some congressman or senator who is questioned in a TownHall about a specific provision of the Constitution and our "godmen" butcher it so bad as they seem the idoit. Depending on party, etc. we laugh but the truth is they all are like this if you really ask them for specifics. If we could go 1 week where these elected godmen were barred any assistants, any legislative or legal researchers, any policy wonk/think tank advisors, lobbyists etc. in other words they were totally on their own, we'd see immediately just how stupid they really were and if you really wanted limited gov't, you'd get it because these people have the brains of a car salesman or snake oil huckster and that's the way they win the vote to begin with. Either the voters themselves are too stupid or they are so linked to single issues that they don't care or want to understand the broader implications of letting Washington run amuck and what that really does mean in the longhaul.

    In the 1980's I read the 1869' work of Lysander Spooner in his book, "No Treason, the Constitution on No Authority" which gave a compelling arguement based on contract law (the constitution purposes to be a social contract) that the document was void on it's face. I seriously doubt if any Congressmen/women have read Spooner but IMO their very actions have in effect done this anyway and thus the Constitution is and has been a dead document just from sheer legal abuse.

    It is always easier to point fingers at so-called public welfare as the biggest source of big gov't and thus the violator of constitutional limitations and there is a point to be made with this. However, as I use to agree with that position and still understand it's longhaul ramifications in a free society I no longer ignore what Randolph Borne said "Warfare is the health of the State!" To validate that claim I'll use none other than Mr. Conservative William F. Buckley who in Jan. 1952 in Commonweal magazine said the following:

    source go down to item 7 and click on the 2 page pdf link​

    Using Buckley's own words, once the Soviet Union went away, where was the need for big gov't? How many people should have been moved back in private labor markets as a result? Or more importantly, once the Soviet enemy was gone, what was needed to take it's place in order to maintain big gov't? And who drove that big truck?

    When it comes to the neo-right or the neo-left, they both stand equally guilty IMO and regardless of election outcomes in November I stand unconvinced any real true positive change will come about. I guess I could put up a $100 bet like Hoaxster but as we've seen recently, even the word "change" has no true fixed definition either!
  4. av8torntn

    av8torntn Well-Known Member

    Very true.

    I think there is a growing movement in this Country to change this. I went to a "town hall" meeting hosted by the guy that will will our Congressional seat last week and just another in a long line of establishment Republicans. He started by saying that he would stand up to the government takeover of health care and stand strong for social security. I got the opportunity to ask the third question. To summarize I asked how was a government takeover of retirement a good thing but a government takeover of healthcare bad? Why should we not be allowed to opt out of the SSI welfare program? Shouldn't we be striving to have a free Country? Standing ovation from a younger crowd. He gave a typical political answer but of blah, blah, blah protect the seniors. Most importantly several people after started their questions with I agree with that guy.....