Posted on 07/05/2011 8:53:47 PM PDT by neverdem
There's little that's intelligent or informed about Time magazine editor Richard Stengel's article "One Document, Under Siege" (June 23, 2011). It contains many grossly ignorant statements about our Constitution. If I believed in conspiracies, I'd say Stengel's article is part of a leftist agenda to undermine respect for the founding values of our nation.
Stengel says: "The framers were not gods and were not infallible. Yes, they gave us, and the world, a blueprint for the protection of democratic freedoms -- freedom of speech, assembly, religion -- but they also gave us the idea that a black person was three-fifths of a human being, that women were not allowed to vote and that South Dakota should have the same number of senators as California, which is kind of crazy. And I'm not even going to mention the Electoral College."
My column last week addressed the compromise whereby each slave was counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of determining representation in the House of Representatives and Electoral College.
Had slaves been counted as whole people, slaveholding states would have had much greater political power. I agree the framers were not gods and were not infallible, but they had far greater wisdom and principle than today's politicians.
The framers held democracy and majority rule in deep contempt. As a matter of fact, the term democracy appears in none of our founding documents. James Madison argued that "measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."
John Adams said: "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."
Stengel's majoritarian vision sees it as anti-democratic...
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
DSL is limited to 5 miles from the ISPs equipment.
I’m at 4.9 miles, with marginal service.
The saving grace is that it contains within itself the means for its own modification.
That's true. They set the bar pretty high though. And once a government is created, even with an amendment process, the advantages all lie with the government.
In between 1776 and 1787, they went from "whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it" to whenever you can get 2/3rds of both houses to propose an amendment, or 2/3rds of the state legislatures to call a convention and propose an amendment, and once you can get 3/4ths of the state legislatures to ratify it, THEN you can alter--but not abolish--the government.
Quite a few lived very much beyond not only the actuarial expectations of the time but beyond those of ours as well - John Adams (91), Jay (84), Madison (85), Franklin (84), Jefferson (83), Charles Thomson (94)...HERE is a Wiki article that details some of the others. Take a look at the age distribution. Mind you, it's (1) a small sample size, and (2) its members wouldn't be members if they hadn't already lived to adulthood, but it is interesting, no? Sort of makes you think about what effect infant mortality had on the population count in those days.
There is, of course, the famous case of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson dying on the same day, which was the 4th of July, 1826, fifty years to the day from the signing of the Declaration. I wouldn't bother trying to draw any deep significance from this stuff but it's fun to consider.
Your hatred of our Constitution is well known. Less known is your opinion as to what should be in its place.
So, with what would you replace our beloved Constitution?
As if you give a rip.
How many proposed amendments to the Articles of Confederation were ratified?
A determined minority may have precisely the same effect upon the rule of law anywhere men are otherwise too burdened with life's cares to notice their freedom being taken from them. The process toward such an end has been perfected by the Left, and follows a formulaic path (my own theory here): deconstruct, discredit, distract, divest, and then defend.
Essentially: radicals first seek to uncouple a target law or social structure from its purpose or function, then they attack its foundation and supporters (often through the use of ad hominem arguments); they employ further means of deceit to confuse the opposition (such as accusing them of what the are themselves doing); then they use simple majorities to expand power beyond their true authority, and finally use public institutions over which they have gained control (media, bureaucracies, the academy) to build a firewall preventing reversal of their gains. And, all the while the same process continues on other fronts.
Do you think it might be somebody rewriting history? Or maybe some sort of... higher intervention?
“I doubt more than 3% of Americans know what you are talking about.”
Too many eligible voters today understand nothing of the original intent of the founders, or what made their ideas so radically different from Europe; that is why they can elect this foreign Muslim in the White House now.
DSL requires the phone company to install new equipment and upgrade existing equipment. Naturally they are looking for the biggest bang for the buck. AT&T can make a lot more money selling their ripof Uverse service than they can installing DSL out here in the country.
I stopped reading right there, because if any educated and aware person doesn't understand the critical (and completely effective) purpose of the three-fifths clause, he is a fraud and isn't qualified to comment on 18th century history, or anything else, for that matter.
Explain it to Jr. High-schoolers and 90% of them will grasp the positive effect of that most important clause to the eventual elimination of slavery.
The irony is that in the actual slave market, black slaves sold for several times the price of a white indentured servant.
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.