An anniversary most meaningless

Sherri, thanks for subscribing since 8/18/2015

View as Webpage | White List Us | Unsubscribe

An anniversary most meaningless It's a mistake to rely on the Constitution. It no longer has any meaning and hasn't for years. The politicians and the courts have determined that the Constitution means what they say it means, not what it says and the Founders intended. Two hundred thirty-one years ago today, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention signed the Constitution it had created in Philadelphia. It would be 10 more months before the first nine states (the necessary number for adoption) approved it. The country began to operate under it on March 4, 1789. It would only survive in force for about 73 years. Today, it survives in name only; and in that just barely so. The public has been trained to think in terms of what is legal and what is illegal under the Constitution, though most know little about what it says or what the Founders intended. In 2004, Congress passed an amendment to a spending bill (that included spending on many things that were unconstitutional) that created a Constitution Day remembrance on September 17. The amendment mandated (what a surprise) that all publicly-funded educational institutions provide educational programming on the history of the American Constitution on that day. Here's a Special Message From Our Friends Dangerous Words from a Dangerous Man In 1977, Lloyd Darland did such of good job of revealing the government's most secret and frightening scam that he was arrested and jailed for writing this book. It was quickly banished, but when I found an old copy, it was clear why his lost book had been suppressed. It will certainly shock you, and could anger you. Click Here to Read Chapter 1 Now... The irony of imposing such a congressional mandate was doubtless lost on the congressweasels passing such a thing, given that there is nothing in the Constitution granting Congress that authority. And given what most Americans know about the Constitution today, I'm sure that irony is lost on them as well. It's also obvious that the public (non)education system has not been any more adept at teaching constitutional history than it has in teaching most everything else that is good and right and true. Today we have a system where the politicians and their elite bosses operate above the law and outside the law. For them, legal is what they say it is or is not; Constitution be damned. But the vast majority of Americans don't care as long as they get their share of crumbs from the federal treasury. The President, all 535 members of Congress and Supreme Court justices take oaths to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. One has to wonder how many have ever read it. Those who claim to seem to find it "troubling," as communist Senator Diane Feinstein does, or said she did during Judge Neil Gorsuch's Supreme Court confirmation hearing: Judge Gorsuch has also stated that he believes judges should look to the original public meaning of the Constitution when they decide what a provision of the Constitution means. This is personal, but I find this originalist judicial philosophy to be really troubling. In essence, it means that judges and courts should evaluate our constitutional rights and privileges as they were understood in 1789. However, to do so would so would not only ignore the intent of the Framers, that the Constitution would be a framework on which to build, but it severely limits the genius of what our Constitution upholds. In other words, Feinstein is "troubled" by the views on government power held by James Madison, James Wilson, Thomas Jefferson and the other Founders. The Founders envisioned — or claimed to envision — a nation with a Federal government that had limited authority, weakened by its division into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial. They believed that the weaker and more inefficient Federal government was the greater would be our liberty and freedom. The United States House of Representatives and Senate represent many things, excluding the American people. But these two bodies are now used by the elite establishment to keep up the aura of democracy and so-called representative government. Members of the House and Senate are manipulated puppets in the paid service of the establishment which owns and runs the U.S. government. The House of Representatives and the Senate have great value, as a matter of fact incalculable value, as symbols of liberty and representative government. But they are hollowed out and gutted symbols, a facade and a myth that serves to keep the American people hoodwinked and blinded to widespread deceptive political chicanery. Americans mistake the symbol of representative government for the thing symbolized. Representative government has evolved into privilege, prestige and wealth. While we slept they carved themselves out an ivory tower of untouchables by prostrating and selling their souls to the money power. The time is long gone when Americans could go to the polls and vote for representative government. The great tragedy is that they still believe that they can. The Founding Fathers absolutely saw our day and how representative government would be usurped by the money power. The concept of prohibition of privilege (nobility) in public office was written into the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 9, Clause 8. Members of Congress and the Senate have surreptitiously acquired the status of nobility and privilege because they have prostituted themselves to the system unequivocally. This proves so well that Congress and the Senate have evolved into nobility and privilege in substance and in fact without the title. The election process in America has become a disguise for corruption that attracts the corrupt. When men and women go to Washington, they quickly learn that they are paid by the Federal government and therefore they are in the hire of the Federal government. But their true bosses are the money power that can ensure whether they remain in the employ of the federal government or not. No allegiance to their constituents is necessary and, as a matter of fact, there is very little pretension. Nor is the any allegiance or pretense of allegiance to the Constitution. Today we have: Wars with no declaration of war. Laws created by executive order. Laws established by alphabet soup agencies. Laws created out of thin air by the courts. We are ruled by a people who, by virtue of their ability to con people out of their money (political donations) and their sole achievement of winning a popularity contest (election) and who as government functionaries sitting virtually untouchable and unaccountable in the corridors of power, have taken it upon themselves the "authority" to decide: What we can and cannot eat. What we can and cannot take for our health. What we can read. What we can say. Where we can and cannot say it. How much we can earn. How much they can take from what we earn. Who gets how much of what they take that we earn. How much and what we can own. How and where we can and cannot invest what we earn. How much of our money we can take out of the bank at one time. How much of our own money we can carry at any one time. How much of our money we can deposit at any one time. How much food costs. How much gas costs. How much insurance costs. What kind of insurance you can and cannot have. What type of health care you can receive. What health treatments you can receive. What we can buy and sell. Where we can buy and sell. Where we can go. What kind of light bulbs we can use. What kind of toilets we can use. How fast we can drive. How efficient our cars, appliances and houses must be. How safe our cars, appliances and houses must be. What we can teach our children. Where we cannot practice our faith. Whom we must serve. With whom we must share a bathroom. What we can grow on our property. What we can do with our property. What we can build on our property and how it must be built. What animals we can keep. What we can and cannot use for self-defense. What kind of ammunition we can purchase. Who gets to buy and sell our information. They believe — with no evidence to back it up and much evidence to the contrary — that by virtue of their ability to con people out of their money and win popularity contests, or because they have risen to positions of authority in the federal bureaucracy, that they are imminently more intelligent than us and better able to look out for us than we are for ourselves, though they rarely state this belief publicly. This despite the fact that among their ranks are pedophiles, adulterers, pornography addicts, sexual abusers, tax cheats, check kiters, drug abusers, extortioners, racketeers, money launderers, embezzlers, serial liars, perjurers, bribers and bribe takers. Who can honestly say we remain a nation of laws and not men? We are governed by an evil and licentious oligarchy. A prescient "Old Whig" warned us what was coming in AntiFederalist No. 46. Writing about the dangers of the so-called "necessary and proper" clause — which is rivaled only by the so-called "general welfare" clause as the nexus of all manner of unconstitutional corruption and tyranny — the Old Whig wrote: My object is to consider that undefined, unbounded and immense power which is comprised in the following clause — "And to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in the government of the United States; or in any department or offices thereof." Under such a clause as this, can anything be said to be reserved and kept back from Congress? Can it be said that the Congress have no power but what is expressed? "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper" — or, in other words, to make all such laws which the Congress shall think necessary and proper — for who shalt judge for the legislature what is necessary and proper? Who shall set themselves above the sovereign? What inferior legislature shall set itself above the supreme legislature? To me it appears that no other power on earth can dictate to them, or control them, unless by force; and force, either internal or external, is one of those calamities which every good man would wish his country at all times to be delivered from. This generation in America have seen enough of war, and its usual concomitants, to prevent all of us from wishing to see any more of it — all except those who make a trade of war. But to the question — without force what can restrain the Congress from making such laws as they please? What limits are there to their authority? I fear none at all. For surely it cannot be justly said that they have no power but what is expressly given to them, when by the very terms of their creation they are vested with the powers of making laws in all cases — necessary and proper; when from the nature of their power, they must necessarily be the judges what laws are necessary and proper. And Jefferson warned us of the judicial "sappers and miners" who would place us under the "despotism of an oligarchy." In an early draft of his first inaugural address, George Washington warned that no "mound of parchmt can be formed so as to stand against the sweeping torrent of boundless ambition on the one side, aided by the sapping current of corrupted morals on the other." Happy Constitution Day. It's a day as meaningless and insignificant as the document it's meant to memorialize. Yours for the truth, Bob Livingston Editor, The Bob Livingston Letter™ To voice your opinion, or read more on personalliberty.com, go here.

You subscribed to Personal Liberty Digest® on 8/18/2015 and are receiving this email at sherribusser@gmail.com because you indicated an interest in receiving special updates and offers from Personal Liberty Alerts. We hope you'll find these updates interesting and informative. But if you'd rather not receive them, click here. You will be immediately removed from our database. Remember, your personal information will never be rented or sold and you may unsubscribe at any time. Personal Liberty Digest® P.O. Box 1105 Cullman, AL 35056 Our Privacy Policy GDPR Policy