Americans, by and large, have not kept themselves informed, and adhered to the limits the Constitution imposes upon our government, which has resulted in more than half the problems we face today as a country, a nation of sheep. And, because the voters themselves do not know, or care, what the Constitution says, they elect candidates who have no intention, or desire, to support and defend it — believing in “the end justifies the means”. It is a vicious cycle that repeats itself every election cycle and won’t stop until the people take the time to learn what the drafters of the Constitution intended when they wrote it.
So, as Lysander Spooner so aptly said, “But whether the Constitution really be one thing or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorizes such a government as we have had or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” I could almost stop right there, saying that is how I feel about our system of government and the document that established it…but I won’t.
Even though the Constitution outlined a fundamentally sound system of government, in theory, the problem is that it was the creation of a group of men who held differing views on what government should look like and what powers it should hold.
Ben Franklin explained it best when he said:
“For when you assemble a number of men to have the advantage of their joint wisdom, you inevitably assemble with those men, all their prejudices, their passions, their errors of opinion, their local interests, and their selfish views. From such an assembly can a perfect production be expected? It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies, who are waiting with confidence to hear that our councils are confounded like those of the Builders of Babel; and that our States are on the point of separation, only to meet hereafter for the purpose of cutting one another’s throats. Thus I consent, Sir, to this Constitution because I expect no better, and because I am not sure, that it is not the best. The opinions I have had of its errors, I sacrifice to the public good. I have never whispered a syllable of them abroad. Within these walls they were born, and here they shall die. If every one of us in returning to our Constituents were to report the objections he has had to it, and endeavor to gain partizans in support of them, we might prevent its being generally received …” (Source: Franklin’s Final Address to the Constitutional Convention.
There were many concerns expressed by these patriots who opposed the Constitution, but the underlying theme that can be found in most of their writings is that the Constitution created a consolidation of the States into a Union under a strong centralized government.
In a more perfect union, a more perfect Republic, our sovereign and independent states would reassert the 9th and 10th Amendments more forcefully, since they have been abrogated out of existence by federal laws and judicial activism; the states should unite themselves together by a perpetual confederacy, without ceasing to be, each individually, a perfect state. They will together constitute a federal republic: their joint deliberations will not impair the sovereignty of each member, though they may, in certain respects, put some restraint on the exercise of it, in virtue of voluntary engagements. A person does not cease to be free and independent when he is obliged to fulfill engagements which he has voluntarily contracted.
One of the primary concerns of the anti-Federalists was: Did the Constitution do away with the status quo and create a consolidation of the States into a single, indivisible Union; or Republic, or did the States still retain all powers which were not expressly given; allowing the government to intrude into and interfere with the lives and liberties of the people.
On June 5, 1788, in a speech opposing ratification of the Constitution, Patrick Henry expressed those exact sentiments as follows:
“I rose yesterday to ask a question which arose in my own mind. When I asked that question, I thought the meaning of my interrogation was obvious: The fate of this question and of America may depend on this: Have they said, we, the States? Have they made a proposal of a compact between states? If they had, this would be a confederation: It is otherwise most clearly a consolidated government. The question turns, Sir, on that poor little thing-the expression, We, the people, instead of the States, of America.“
It should be obvious, that the people had already established republics by their having created their own State Legislatures, so they actually had no need to create another Republic for the purpose of governing them all. The purpose for which the delegates were sent to Philadelphia was to arrive at suggestions for amendments, in order to make the existing Confederation Government adequate for the needs of the country; not to toss the existing form of government in the trash heap and replace it with one of their creation.
If the powers given to this new form of government were to be exercised primarily upon the States, then why did the drafters of the Constitution demand that it be ratified by the voice of the people; as it was the States whose authority would be further restricted, or usurped, by the creation of this new form of government. However, if this new system of government was, in fact, a consolidation and a diminishing of the sovereignty of the States, then it would make sense that the people must give their consent to it.
Yet, in Federalist 45 James Madison attempted to ensure the people that the States would retain their authority over the lives and liberties of the people by saying:
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.
The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”
Most Americans believe the Bill of Rights protects certain rights against governmental interference. That is only partially true since the Bill of Rights are amendments to the Constitution which created our federal government; not the constitutions which framed the various State governments. Therefore, technically they only apply to the federal government. However, an argument can also be made that, since the Constitution itself is the Supreme Law of the land, any amendment to it could be implied to apply to the States as well.
Keeping things simple, let’s just say that the Bill of Rights only applies to the federal government. How is it then that the government can dictate what kind of guns private citizens may own; how is it that the Supreme Court — which is PART of the federal government — decides whether a State may display the Ten Commandments, or that children be prohibited from praying in school; how is it that the federal government can violate the 4th Amendment by spying upon the private conversations of every man, woman, and child in this country, just to keep us safe from terrorism?
There exists a whole list of things the federal government has done which are not among the powers listed in Article 1, Section 8 as those powers are given to Congress; which in case you have forgotten, is the lawmaking body of our government; not the President as so many seem to think.
This has all been done because of the concept of implied powers; something introduced while George Washington was President. That occurred because the Constitution itself did not provide specific enough limitations upon the powers it was granting government; leaving loopholes by which government has expanded its power well beyond those originally intended.
So, if that is true, then the Constitution itself failed the people as it did not provide sufficient means for the people to resist the encroaching powers of government and to ward off tyranny and oppression.
Not one individual can provide me with the Article and Clause that grants any of us the authority to arrest and charge any of our elected officials, for the crime of violating the Constitution, because such a clause simply does not exist. And, it is this oversight that has resulted in the Constitution’s failure, by not providing the means to oppose a government that no longer adheres to any kind of limits upon their power and authority.
I only care whether the party that is in control adheres to the Constitutional limitations imposed upon them and seeks to protect and defend my rights…that and nothing more, and both parties have failed miserably in this duty. If the government does not do this, then I revoke my consent to being governed by it.
Why do Americans still support a government that no longer resembles or represents the ideas and beliefs which led our Founders to seek their independence from a tyrant? Why do they so meekly submit to tyranny and oppression today? Is there not a drop of patriotic blood left in their bodies?
One certainly must wonder what has kept Americans from marching on D.C, with rifles in hand and sixteen feet lengths of rope, so criminals like Obama, Biden, Hillary Clinton, Loretta Lynch, James Comey, John Brennan, Samantha Power, Andrew McCabe, Robert Mueller, John Kerry, Susan Rice, Alexander Vindman and so many others can be hung from the highest tree or the balcony of the Capitol Building; especially in light of the current double standard of “law” applied in America.
All I see is a nation of sheep who meekly obey the commands of their masters. What has become of the land of the free and the home of the brave?
I seek and work to restore America — along with any and all like-minded Americans — to Her Founding Principles and more of an Originalist approach towards the implementation of the U.S. Constitution, which has been bastardized far and away from anything ever intended by the Founding Fathers.
If Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams, and Thomas Jefferson were alive today they would either have fled the country, or they would be serving time, in Guantanamo Bay as domestic terrorists, because our government has become a soul-sucking, liberty killing monster and the bulk of the people of this country no longer seem to truly care about limited government or individual liberty, seeking only comfort and security, whether it’s the Democrats or Republicans providing it.
And it makes me sick to death to watch.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
100,000 up votes!!!!!
Government is the cause of nearly 100% of the problems we face, not simply “more than 50%.”
Remember “The PATRIOT act?” Suckers…that was the beginning of the end, brought to you by our freedom loving village idiot GWB.
The compliant , obedient sheeple are the major cause of the tyrannical onslaught the world is facing today. They have simply forgotten how to think , reason and question .
Forgotten or never taught or willfully in denial?
Christians see people as an end. Satanists see them as a means. The legal government documents are not more important than that.
Why make moral arguments supported by a legal document?
Sadly a large % of Americans are not worth the effort to save them.
“Most people are not as smart as you.”
– A Friend
This is the single most difficult truth you are likely to face in your lifetime. Good people, by and large, assume that everyone else is their equal in terms of capacity. They have the potential to be as informed, as honorable, as focused, yadda, yadda, yadda.
But it’s not true. It isn’t even remotely accurate. Most people are simply two-legged livestock. They aren’t missing out, deprived, held back or limited, they are operating at their full potential and are perfectly happy to be told what to do. In fact, you are their biggest problem because your very existence is a contradiction to everything that they aspire to.
All of mankind has existed in one of two states; freedom and bondage and at any given time, depending where a society happens to be historically, we are heading away from one and towards the other. I bet you could guess where we happen to be right now.
When I was taking my Marine Ops courses a couple decades ago the name used for cruise ships were cattle boats. Herd them on, float’m and feed’m for a bit, then herd them off. Cattle…
I make that assumption all the time. Do you know how disheartening that is for a person…me…of decidedly average intellect?
Most people are not as smart as you.
Almost half.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the ‘stupid’ is not about IQ. I think it is about emotional continence and ‘personality’. There is the expression IYI. We are all the lead character in Idiocracy.
Yes.
“Most people are not as smart as you.”
But, they’re generally happier people. Stupid, but blissful.
I can’t decide which is better…smart or stupid.
If you’re wondering, you’ve already made the decision.
Bu-da-bump. Bing. That was funny.
The biggest problem is that the stupids are very smart at knowing I am not one of them. They are alternatively intelligence, or they would not be winning. Of course, they will destroy the necessary conditions of their supremacy, being mainly us.
I can’t believe you just expressed the Big Epiphany! I regard most people as subhuman. I do believe government favoritism has skewed the breeding bias a tad.
And the ‘Shepherds’ are the wolves?
https://reformationcharlotte.org/2021/05/18/baylor-university-to-charter-lgbtq-student-group-on-campus/
American evangelicals are disgusting. How far did they think they could blaspheme and pervert before people would notice? Their flocks are just idiots trying really hard and not understand why its not working.
Watch “In the Valley of Sin” on Fox Nation and you will see evil at work on extremely low IQ people. Wenatchee, Washington and Bob Perez will also show evil at work.
Liberty, secured for We the [Sovereign] People in the Preamble, 5th and 14th Amendments, includes the Right to Pursue a Livelihood or business. Ref. 16A, Am Jur Constitutional Law, #562, 1979 edition. Such Rights are not suitable objects for taxation. If it were subject to tax, the government could take 100% of your earnings and you would be a slave.
26 USC ##7201-7215 used in indictments for income tax charges have been used as a penalty statute for a multitude of tax charges such as admission taxes, gambling taxes, gasoline taxes, etc. They therefore cannot allege violation of a “known legal duty” required for a valid indictment.
When you sign over the covenant ‘Taxpayer’s name’ under threat of perjury, you are volunteering that you are a ‘taxpayer’ legally responsible for a tax.
The income tax is a scam. Lawyers who aggressively push the issue go to jail on bogus charges.
I am concerned that this metaphor leaves us exposed to better organization. We will never beat these people as individuals. We can only beat them as a pack of wolves. The tradition of western individualism is being used against us. We must form packs and work together.
Instead of listening to the libertarians and business interests around him, Trump should have out-nationalized the socialists/sheep. People want to belong, naturally. He should have nationalizes the illness instead of leaving decisions to states. He should have organized national health and illness prevention campaigns.
We will never defeat the anti-whites with libertarianism.
The majority have perhaps but many of us have not and will continue to exercise those freedoms with or without State approval. The Constitution gives us certain rights and powers and until it is amended to the contrary the law is on our side. Our mentally challenged judges may not agree but it is worth a fight over and I am ready to fight all they way to the Zoopreme Court.
I would simply note that inalienable God-given rights cannot be abrogated or eradicated. Our rights are not contingent on the existence of The Bill of Rights, which are negative rights that supposedly spell out what government cannot do to ‘We the People’.
Even with these Amendments, many Marxists in this country and the halls of government consistently work to suppress those rights. With this in mind, it is up to each of us to fight for our rights, when we must, and to safeguard them enough, by standing with like-minded patriots, to see that such fights arise far and few between.
A majority could repeal every single one of the amendments of the Bill of Rights, and your right to free speech, freedom of peaceable assembly, freedom of religion, the right to keep and bear arms and so on would still exist, although such a move would remove the greater impediment to the government to further suppress those rights.
In reviewing Heller vs. District of Columbia [2008], one should note that in regards to our right to keep and bear arms, the Court found that this was in fact a natural and God-given right that preexists the Constitution and government itself. The Court stated that it was an individual right and each person had the right to arm themselves with firearms of the same sophistication and technological advancement as the U.S. military.
Our rights have been under assault from the very beginning of this nation, and there’s nothing that makes this much more clearer than the constant assault of religious liberty and the fallacy of “separation of church and state”, which in no way was the Original Intent of the Founders, noted by anyone doing an honest study of the nation’s history.
“I would simply note that inalienable God-given rights cannot be abrogated or eradicated.”
Everything you wrote after that sentence proves your first sentence is a lie. I’m sure your analysis is correct.
Not if read and comprehended properly. Everything afterwards notes we have given a certain amount of power to the federal government for the purpose of defending and protecting those rights, and that this power is, in fact, sometimes, often times abused.
In its properly understood context, even if suppressed, those rights exist, since they are God-given. Even the Court acknowledged they preexist government, in Heller v DC.
A majority can quite possibly attempt to vote to suppress and neutralize them, or eradicate them all together; however, any such vote would be illegitimate and unconstitutional in and of itself. And, properly understood as being illegitimate, those willing would do what was necessary, up to and including exercising their right to self-defense as seen in Nature and as an inalienable right.
Telling a man or a society that his rights no longer exist or using force to trample them doesn’t negate them in the slightest, unless that man and society sit quietly back and accept the tyrant’s edict, diktat or fiat. One’s rights cannot be destroyed, if one looks at them as the divine gift they are.
They can only be taken from those who give up and lose the will to ensure that freedom, liberty and our inalienable rights are preserved for all future generations.
I am far from the first to posit such a similar premise, so I suggest you recalibrate your thought process.
Try to grasp, if you can, through your obvious limited knowledge on political philosophy, that our rights are absolute, universal and inalienable. They are not susceptible or contingent to any man’s or group’s arbitrary whim. Simply by virtue of being human, debatable in your case … Hahaha … but for regular Folks, just because they were born, they have certain inherent, inalienable rights.
Subhuman projection. lol I get that a lot. You are regular alright. Your third-world results await you. All those human rights, except for me. I count you as a hostile as well, pest. Your inviolable rights don’t actually work, like your ‘political philosophy’. lol You write much and say little.
You’re right. They don’t work … only if one is an uneducated fool, such as you, who does not understand them or know how to use or exert them properly and in an efficacious manner.
I’m impressed with your commitment to futility. In the main blog picture, which one is you? Jesus loves you fur shore.
You certainly do have quite a low-brow intellect, I see. No facts to show the merit of your own assertion, so you resort to ad hominem attacks. I have to wonder how far down the evolution scale I’d have to look to find your picture.
But I daresay you certainly must be one damned ugly self-made son of a bitch, because the best part of you more than likely slid down your daddy’s leg. … just sayin …
Was thinking back if I was 20 yrs younger and if it would make a difference. Then realized that GW Shrub did a lot of shit that helped move this along and I did nothing.
Good article! Two events, of the legion of events, stand out IMHO: 1) Lincoln the Thundercunt’s War of Northern Aggression, changing “The United States of America,” from a pluralistic definition to a singular one; 2) American Communist’s long walk through the institutions set to hyperactive in 1979, with the creation of the Dept of Ed.
Many events within the legion: 1803’s Alien and Sedition Act, green backs, yellow journalism, “Remember the Maine, Lusitania, Pearl Harbor…,” Trust Busting, Federal Reserve Act, Income Tax, Wilsonism, New Deal, Great Society, $3 reduction for $1 increase (Not! Deficits do not matter), War on….
Why am I being censored? I thought that was a liberal tactic?