Skip to comments.Happy Constitution Day!
Posted on 09/17/2017 7:51:08 AM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
A Republic, if you can keep it.
Lots of good info here. Bios of all the Founding Fathers/Signers of our Constitution.
Some of us are trying! :)
Thank You,Lord, for this magnificent charter!
see bing.com homepage today. :o)
Why isn’t it a National Holiday, instead of Labor Day or MLK Day?
It was great while it lasted.
It ended on Usurpation Day January 20, 2009, when BOTH parties colluded to violate the Constitution and allow a self admitted British subject to usurper the office of President.
We’ll have Obama Do Nothing Holiday long before the Constitution is recognized.
I’m big on the Constitution — thank you for posting this! :D
Thank you for this thread!
Of the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land until amended in accordance with Article V, Alexander Hamilton asserted:
In June 2016, Trump stated: "Yet today, 240 years after the Revolution, we have turned things completely upside-down." - Donald Trump
Until the people have, by some solemn and authoritative act, annulled or changed the established form, it is binding upon them collectively, as well as individually; and no presumption or even knowledge of their sentiments, can warrant their representatives [the executive, judiciary, or legislature]; in a departure from it prior to such an act. Alexander Hamilton
And it's not just about jobs and economic opportunity. It's about freedom, exercise of "Creator-endowed rights and liberties," and opportunity for each citizen, not just self-appointed elitists who fancy themselves as entitled to make decisions for all.
Thomas Jefferson wrote to Roger Weightman on June 24, 1826:
" I should, indeed, with peculiar delight, have met and exchanged there congratulations personally with the small band, the remnant of that host of worthies, who joined with us on that day, in the bold and doubtful election we were to make for our country, between submission or the sword; and to have enjoyed with them the consolatory fact, that our fellow citizens, after half a century of experience and prosperity, continue to approve the choice we made. may it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all,) the Signal of arousing men to burst the chains, under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings & security of self-government. That form which we have substituted, restores the free right to the unbounded exercise of reason and freedom of opinion. all eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. the general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view. the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of god. these are grounds of hope for others. for ourselves, let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them."Now, let's see, the same people who failed "We, the People" by not defending our rights of conscience from the dictates and censorship, regulation, redistribution and debt of "progressives" and their imperial president--these same people (Ryan, Boehner, McConnell, et al) whose failure to deny funding and halt those intrusions into our liberty, and aroused "the People" to vote for Candidate Trump, are now urging other Republicans to override their fellow Republicans' votes.
Some time ago, I posted the following:
"Perhaps the so-called "progressive" enemies of freedom understand better than those who fancy themselves as "conservatives" that in order to reverse the Founders' ideas of "People over government," and institute "government over People," they must first marginalize and destroy the ideas from which liberty is derived.
The writings of America's Founders are replete with references which rebuke would-be tyrants and cite a Higher Source for life, liberty and rights. Early histories confirm those facts.
As so-called "progressives" have led a movement in forsaking the Founders' "reliance on Divine Providence," and belief that individuals are "endowed by their Creator," they also have forsaken the principles underlying America's Constitution and Declaration of Independence, and are systematically dismantling the greatest protections for liberty ever established for a people.
"Ideas have consequences"(Weaver).
The ideas of 1776 came out of a set of ideas consistent with liberty.
We tend to forget, or have never considered, that other world views existed then, as now.
Unless today's citizens rediscover the ideas of liberty existing in what Jefferson called "the American mind" of 1776, we risk going back to the "Old World" ideas which preceded the "Miracle of America."
There are those who call themselves "progressives," when, in fact, their ideas are regressive and enslaving, and as old as the history of civilization.
Would suggest to any who wish an authentic history of the ideas underlying American's founding a visit to this web site, at which Richard Frothingham's outstanding 1872 "History of the Rise of the Republic of the United States" can be read on line.
This 600+-page history traces the ideas which gave birth to the American founding. Throughout, Richard Frothingham, the historian, develops the idea that it is "the Christian idea of man" which allowed the philosophy underlying the Declaration of Independence and Constitution to become a reality--an idea which recognizes the individual and the Source of his/her "Creator"-endowed life, liberty and law.
Is there any wonder that the enemies of freedom, the so-called "progressives," do not promote such authentic histories of America? Their philosophy puts something called "the state," or "global interests" as being superior to individuals and requires a political elitist group to decide what role individuals are to play.
In other words, they must turn the Founders' ideas upside-down in order to achieve a common mediocrity for individuals and power for themselves.
No wonder the First President of this Republic issued a grave warning for future generations on the "dangers" of the "spirit of Party"!
George Washington on the Baneful Effects of Political Parties
“Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party...”
Excerpts from George Washington’s Farewell Address
September 19, 1796
“... One of the expedients of Party to acquire influence, within particular districts, is to misrepresent the opinions & aims of other Districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies & heart burnings which spring from these misrepresentations. They tend to render Alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal Affection.
“All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and Associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, controul counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the Constituted authorities are distructive of this fundamental principle and of fatal tendency. They serve to Organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force — to put in the place of the delegated will of the Nation, the will of a party; often a small but artful and enterprizing minority of the Community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public Administration the Mirror of the ill concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the Organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common councils and modefied by mutual interests. However combinations or Associations of the above description may now & then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, & to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
“... in a country so extensive as ours, a Government of as much vigour as is consistent with the perfect security of Liberty is indispensable — Liberty itself will find in such a Government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest Guardian. It is indeed little else than a name, where the Government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction ...
“I have already intimated to you the danger of Parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on Geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, & warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party, generally.
“This Spirit, unfortunately, is inseperable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human Mind. It exists under different shapes in all Governments, more or less stifled, controuled, or repressed; but in those of the popular form it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy.
“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissention, which in different ages & countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders & miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security & repose in the absolute power of an Individual: and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
“Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight) the common & continual mischiefs of the spirit of Party are sufficient to make it the interest and the duty of a wise People to discourage and restrain it.
“It serves always to distract the Public Councils and enfeeble the Public Administration. It agitates the Community with ill founded Jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot & insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence & corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country, are subjected to the policy and will of another.
“There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the Administration of the Government and serve to keep alive the spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true--and in Governments of a Monarchical cast Patriotism may look with endulgence, if not with favour, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate & assuage it. A fire not to be quenched; it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest instead of warming it should consume."
Thanks for posting, I hope people will be inspired to read more of the writings of the men of that time.
They chose their words carefully for the Constitution.
They did not use Native born citizen, someone just born here.
The did not just use citizen. The whole preamble of Art. II sec. 1 exempts themselves as they knew there could not be any natural born citizens for at least 35 years.
They used natural born citizen, one can only naturally be a citizen when there are no alternatives under natural law, born here of citizen parents.
They knew precisely what it meant.
I would hope that after educating themselves about the founders they would conclude that a Kenyan/British subject from Indonesia is not a natural born citizen and is ineligible to be President.
Thanks for posting
Thanks for posting this, I ran across mention of it on twitter earlier today and was glad to see there is a special day to honor and celebrate the Constitution of The United States of America.
**Why isnt it a National Holiday, instead of Labor Day or MLK Day?**
Yes you are right.
Politically correctness in all it’s many manifestations need to be nipped in the bud and quick.
PC is rotting the foundations of the USA
Excellent info, thanks!
We should petition the government to make it a national holiday. maybe someone would then take the time to actually read the Constitution and know that the Federal ‘courts’ are lying to us all and ripping that constitution to shreds in their vane efforts to impose their own ideological agenda rather than simply uphold the law agreed upon by congress and the states as un elected officials.
Remembering the U. S. Constitution: The Law of the Land
Accuracy in Academia ^ | September 17, 2017 | Malcolm A. Kline
Posted on 9/17/2017, 8:28:36 PM by Academiadotorg
Republican presidents from Dwight D. Eisenhower to George H. W. Bush have referred to U. S. Supreme Court decisions as "the law of the land." Actually, that distinction belongs to the document we celebrate todaythe U. S. Constitution.
If you want a good treatise on it, read The Theme Is Freedom: Religion, Politics, and the American Tradition by M. Stanton Evans. "In fact, the Constitution was the work not of a moment, an hour, or even a lifetime, but of two millennia of Western thought, political struggle and hard-won knowledge about the state," Evans wrote. "The Constitution is an almost perfect summation of the themes expounded in this essay."
"Virtually every doctrine, value, institutional development and painful lesson gleaned through all the centuries since Magna Carta converged on the Statehouse in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787." It's staggering to realize that the original delegates to the Constitutional Convention had an intimate understanding of the history which preceded it: You would be hard put to find members of the current Congress who have a working knowledge of the past 230 years since those storied statesmen convened.
"Here were combined the notions of the law above the king, the need to impose restraints on power, the wisdom of diffusing authority instead of having it focused in one center, that were the chief political doctrines of a free society, annealed and tested in the fires of battle," Evans wrote of the Constitutional Conventions. "As noteworthy as the ideas that guided the convention were the men who held them."
"While perhaps not quite an 'assembly of demi-gods,' as Jefferson put it, the people who attended made an impressive muster: Washington and Franklin, Madison and Hamilton, Dickinson and Wilson, John Rutledge and Roger Sherman, George Mason and George Wythe, Oliver Ellsworth and Elbridge Gerry."
It's hard not to think of a classic routine political satirist Mort Sahl used during the 1972 campaign, "In less than 200 years, weve gone from Madison and Adams to Nixon and McGovern."
"What can we make of this? Darwin was wrong!" In other words, this devolution in statesmen was proof positive, at least politically, that we did not evolve into a higher species.
"Despite the absence of Jefferson, Patrick Henry and the Adamses, this was a company of heroes, distinguished for character, principle, and understanding," Evans wrote of the founders. "If one were looking for signs of providential care in the creation of America--and the framers often did--it would be found in the gathering of these men, with these particular qualities, at this juncture of our history."
Evans goes on to describe the debate itself. What is interesting about that description is that those original debates over the Constitution were the exact obverse of current congressional discourse should give us pause because the former were so stunningly successful while the latter rarely are. If the Hippocratic Oath--"First do no harm"--were taken by government officials, they would wind up violating it on the first full day of business.
"Almost everything was discussed in terms of immediate past or historical experience, with little being said of an abstract of strictly theoretical nature," Evans wrote. "The most frequent references were to things that had happened in the states (or colonies) themselves, followed by comment on British or other European practice, then by observations on the classical republics (mostly by way of bad example)."
"The standard used throughout was what had worked, and how, and whether it could be expected to work again." Imagine conducting the business of the government that way, particularly at the federal level.
Malcolm A. Kline is the executive director of Accuracy in Academia. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Yes you are correct, Great idea!
What a good idea for activism; to work to re-establish our Constitutional Republic.
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.