Tuesday, May 02, 2006

Betrayed From Within....

It might do well for you to be sitting down while reading the following from Mr. James Madison. As well as refraining from eating or drinking, as there may be danger in choking. For James shows, in explicit detail, how that We The People are in fact being betrayed by our supposed public servants....

"A fifth class of provisions in favor of the federal authority consists of the following restrictions on the authority of the several States:....

"....Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligation of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. The two former are expressly prohibited by the declarations prefixed to some of the State constitutions, and all of them are prohibited by the spirit and scope of these fundamental charters. Our own experience has taught us, nevertheless, that additional fences against these dangers ought not to be omitted. Very properly, therefore, have the convention added this constitutional bulwark in favor of personal security and private rights; and I am much deceived if they have not, in so doing, as faithfully consulted the genuine sentiments as the undoubted interests of their constituents. The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less informed part of the community. They have seen, too, that one legislative interference is but the first link of a long chain of repetitions, every subsequent interference being naturally produced by the effects of the preceding. They very rightly infer, therefore, that some thorough reform is wanting, which will banish speculations on public measures, inspire a general prudence and industry, and give a regular course to the business of society...."

2. "This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

"The indiscreet zeal of the adversaries to the Constitution has betrayed them into an attack on this part of it also, without which it would have been evidently and radically defective. To be fully sensible of this, we need only suppose for a moment that the supremacy of the State constitutions had been left complete by a saving clause in their favor.

"In the first place, as these constitutions invest the State legislatures with absolute sovereignty, in all cases not excepted by the existing articles of Confederation, all the authorities contained in the proposed Constitution, so far as they exceed those enumerated in the Confederation, would have been annulled, and the new Congress would have been reduced to the same impotent condition with their predecessors.

"In the next place, as the constitutions of some of the States do not even expressly and fully recognize the existing powers of the Confederacy, an express saving of the supremacy of the former would, in such States, have brought into question every power contained in the proposed Constitution.

"In the third place, as the constitutions of the States differ much from each other, it might happen that a treaty or national law, of great and equal importance to the States, would interfere with some and not with other constitutions, and would consequently be valid in some of the States, at the same time that it would have no effect in others.

"In fine, the world would have seen, for the first time, a system of government founded on an inversion of the fundamental principles of all government; it would have seen the authority of the whole society every where subordinate to the authority of the parts; it would have seen a monster, in which the head was under the direction of the members.

3. "The Senators and Representatives, and the members of the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution."

"It has been asked why it was thought necessary, that the State magistracy should be bound to support the federal Constitution, and unnecessary that a like oath should be imposed on the officers of the United States, in favor of the State constitutions.

"Several reasons might be assigned for the distinction. I content myself with one, which is obvious and conclusive. The members of the federal government will have no agency in carrying the State constitutions into effect. The members and officers of the State governments, on the contrary, will have an essential agency in giving effect to the federal Constitution. The election of the President and Senate will depend, in all cases, on the legislatures of the several States. And the election of the House of Representatives will equally depend on the same authority in the first instance; and will, probably, forever be conducted by the officers, and according to the laws, of the States...."

"...We have now reviewed, in detail, all the articles composing the sum or quantity of power delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, and are brought to this undeniable conclusion, that no part of the power is unnecessary or improper for accomplishing the necessary objects of the Union. The question, therefore, whether this amount of power shall be granted or not, resolves itself into another question, whether or not a government commensurate to the exigencies of the Union shall be established; or, in other words, whether the Union itself shall be preserved...."

Well now, can you imagine that? Seems we have some technical discrepancies here doesn’t it? If I’m not mistaken, Mr. Madison has shown how that our whole system is operating out of the bounds of Original Intent. But, that’s just me. What do you think of the matter? Curious isn’t it?

Question is, how can We The People get this PERVERSION corrected? It is quite apparent that the U.S. Supreme Court either doesn’t understand the Constitution. Or, has a perfect understanding and is content in allowing the Infringement of our Right. How are we to rectify this grievance? Since the intended safeguard is plainly disinterested in performing it’s sworn duty. I’ll venture one step farther. Why are We The People paying these supposed servants to steal our Rights away?


At 1:05 AM, Blogger Unalienable Rights said...

Excellent research.

As if the infringement of the 2nd weren't egregious enough they use these infringements as license to violate the other confines of the Constitution.

Why should we be so surpirsed. We have allowed Marxists to occupy our positions of power.

Anarchists, communists, socialists, shariaists and all manner of people bearing abhorent ideologies are usurping power from the people.

How does one define "a long train of abuses?"

At 12:33 AM, Blogger E. David Quammen said...

unalienable said - "How does one define "a long train of abuses?"

The first that comes to mind is Hitlery Clintoon. Then there's Michael BloominIdiotberg, Diane Feinswein, Chuck 'Usurping' Schumer, and John 'I shoot kids running away, who have dropped their weapon, in the back while in the safety of a boat' Kerry. Of course there is also Teddy 'Drink & Kill' Kennedy, Arnold 'Rights Terminator' Schwarzenegger and who can forget Sarah and Jim Brady.

That is MORE than enough for me. Restoration of a TRUE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC is way past due!


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home