Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: ...Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such;...

Posted 5 years ago on Dec. 31, 2012, 10:34 a.m. EST by FawkesNews (1290)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

... because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other....Ben Franklin



We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution...Abraham Lincoln



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by PublicCurrency (1387) 5 years ago

The United States Constitution is the second greatest literary work in history, second only to the Holy Bible. It is the highest law of our nation, even though our politicians do not always follow it. We must demand their allegiance to it. We should impeach everyone of the political class that tramples our laws.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Interesting take on literary works. There are so many of them.

Of course we should hold accountable everyone in the money/political class that has trampled our laws. The Federal Reserve is a conglomerate of traitors. Impeachment is not an option for traitors.

[-] 1 points by zacherystaylor (243) 5 years ago

Even if this was the best they could do at the time it clearly isn't as good as it should be and it should be reconsidered carefully and ratified by the public not just the politicians. The original Constitution still supported slavery and it had many other problems but the parts that are good are the parts that they're trying to do away with now. Like the current insane interpretation of the first amendment.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Well said. The underlying element of the Constitution is the rule of the people by the people. It still remains so. Awareness and education are the tools by which the people shall retain that rule. It is the responsibility of every single person who has even an inkling of what corruption has done to the world to exert the power of speech to spread that awareness.

[-] 1 points by zacherystaylor (243) 5 years ago

You're right about the education part, among other thing; in order for a democracy to suceed the public has to have the information and education they need to participate in decision making. That should mean that availability of education should be arranged one way or another. they might not ahve had the resources then but we have much more now.

Unfortuatly both the media and the education system is being influenced if not completely controlled by the corporations. Until this is reformed it won't be a real democracy.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

The Constitution can be obtained for free. No American should ever be without one.

Sort of places the responsibility directly back on the people to place responsibility back on the elected officials who in turn will place responsibility back on the bankers.

[-] 1 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

To label our Constitution a "living" document is to destine it to an untimely death.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

"Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right."...Thomas Jefferson

Some founders believed in revising the Constitution frequently. Likely not a bad idea.

[-] 1 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

That's not entirely true; Jefferson also believed in America's independence, and in individual freedom; without the Federal limitations we become a nation of arbitrary law destined to serve at the political whim and pleasure of the King.

The Constitution has been so readily revised by our courts that it's protections no longer exist; we're talking about a relic of colonial Americanism.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

If you were to read quote of Jefferson you may find your own words inherent in them. I do.

As for your last sentence... Please refer to the quote of Jefferson above. If you need links for research I am more than happy to provide them.

Lastly, my agreement with you was present before you posted your post.

[-] -1 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

In November of 1787 Jefferson stated the following: "I like much the general idea of framing a government which should go on of itself peaceably, without needing continual recurrence to state legislatures." This seemingly contradicts your above quote which was entirely intellectual in nature.

He was in France when the Federal Constitution was adopted, in Philadelphia when Virginia's state Constitution was adopted.

Jefferson subsequently drafted his own Constitution; although quite similar the most striking difference between that which was adopted and that which he would have proposed had he been available for either is that it emancipated all slaves and abolished slavery in its entirety.

This is also a seeming contradiction in that only Washington ensured the emancipation of his slaves in death, yet, it cannot be ignored that Jefferson fully acknowledged his relationship to Sally Hemmings; in colonial times only relatives were named in wills.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

With respect... please see the title of the original post. It is a quotation of Ben Franklin regarding imperfections in the Constitution. The Constitution was never accepted as verbatim absolute correctness. By anyone.

Jefferson was in France as the replacement of Ben Franklin as delegate of the United States. He had already drafted the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. Whether or not he fully approved of the final draft of any is irrelevant since he was a believer in the democratic process as the means of government for the United States.

I for one agree that suffrage should have been abolished at that time and history showed us all it should have.

I suspect 'LeoYo' may have the knowledge to address further your inquiries. I actually agree with you more than you know. I hope for his input.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

Jefferson did not draft the Constitution; he had no input whatsoever on the Constitution.

Although certainly I respect your opinion, and the right to opinion, I do not agree that this is a "living" document; rather it is an inanimate object which if not sanctified, and glorified, will be dismantled at the political whim of presidents, congress, and their court jesters. And for the most part I believe it already has been.

That is why we are keeping our right to bear arms.

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 5 years ago

You realize that what you believe flies in the face of the history of the United States of America. Even if you do not believe it to be a living document, the interpretation of the Constitution has changed throughout the history of this nation.

Those who believe it does not change are Conservative and those who change it are Progressive. I respect your opinion and veracity at defending its current interpretation, but don't be foolish and think it is immovable. Such a conviction disregards historical trends.

I have read many places that the document was written with vague terms to give future generations freedom of interpretation and freedom from being beholden to past prejudices and faulty understandings.

[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 5 years ago

It's not that it is vague or ambiguous - it is rather succinct - but that situations arise that fall between the cracks; we must then reach to rights enumerated to form a defense. And sometimes it's a stretch.

It was written in simple form, intended as accessible to the masses, with an intent of affording some maximum freedom to some maximum majority.

That maxim of maximum freedom no longer exists; Constitutional protections no longer exist because over time the courts have repeatedly introduced spin to rule unconstitutionally - our Supreme Court has repeatedly violated the rights of the people. To read into the Constitution to insert words and meaning that is not there, is to disregard the protections it affords.

And believe it or not, the courts have been just as harmful to the progressive as they have to the conservative.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

...Jefferson also drew on his own proposed draft of the Virginia Constitution... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson

Jefferson was very involved in the United States.

Many have attempted the dismantling of the Constitution . All have failed. It is in a constant state of assault from those who wish to subjugate the masses. That is why it was written.

As or the 2nd Amendment..."The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it"...Thomas Jefferson

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 5 years ago

"From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion."

-Thomas Jefferson (Notes on the State of Virginia) http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/#comment-525979

"If, then, control of the people over the organs of their government be the measure of their republicanism, and I confess I know no other measure, it must be agreed that our governments have much less of republicanism than ought to have been expected; in other words, that the people have less regular control over their agents, than their rights and their interests require."

Thomas Jefferson in a letter to John Taylor dated May 28, 1816. http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/#comment-756688

"This has been the course of England, and her examples have fearful influence on us. In copying her we do not seem to consider that like premises induce like consequences. The bank mania is one of the most threatening of these imitations. It is raising up a moneyed aristocracy in our country which has already set the government at defiance, and although forced at length to yield a little on this first essay of their strength, their principles are unyielded and unyielding. These have taken deep root in the hearts of that class from which our legislators are drawn, and the sop to Cerberus from fable has become history. Their principles lay hold of the good, their pelf of the bad, and thus those whom the Constitution had placed as guards to its portals, are sophisticated or suborned from their duties."

Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Josephus B. Stuart dated May 10, 1817 http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/#comment-749610

"Hamilton’s financial system had then past. It had two objects. First as a puzzle, to exclude popular understanding & inquiry. Secondly, as a machine for the corruption of the legislature; for he avowed the opinion that man could be governed by one of two motives only, force or interest: force he observed, in this country, was out of the question; and the interests therefore of the members must be laid hold of, to keep the legislature in unison with the Executive. And with grief and shame it must be acknowledged that his machine was not without effect. That even in this, the birth of our government, some members were found sordid enough to bend their duty to their interests, and to look after personal, rather than public good."

Thomas Jefferson in "Anas" dated February 4, 1818 http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/#comment-748866

"We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is nearing its end. It has cost a vast amount of treasure and blood. . . . It has indeed been a trying hour for the Republic; but I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless."

Abraham Lincoln in a letter to Col. William F. Elkins dated November 21, 1864 http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/#comment-750723

"A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the Nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men... We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world—no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men."

Woodrow Wilson in 1916 as quoted by former Senator Robert L. Owen (the Father of the Federal Reserve Act) in "National Economy and the Banking System," Senate Documents No. 23, p. 100, 76th Congress, 1st Session, 1939. http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/#comment-751508

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Thank you for your well thought out response. Your knowledge of the founding of America is prolific to say the least. I give you these; the results of your assignment as I look forward your next barrage of information.

"Unless the mass retains sufficient control over those entrusted with the powers of their government, these will be perverted to their own oppression, and to the perpetuation of wealth and power in the individuals and their families selected for the trust. Whether our Constitution has hit on the exact degree of control necessary, is yet under experiment."...Thomas Jefferson to M. van der Kemp, 1812.

"It is every Americans' right and obligation to read and interpret the Constitution for himself."...Thomas Jefferson

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first...Thomas Jefferson

The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it...Thomas Jefferson

The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."...Patrick Henry

“I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of Constitutional power.”...Thomas Jefferson

The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending against all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks...Samuel Adams

[-] 0 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 5 years ago

To paraphrase and add to Ben Franklin's statements:

'We have given you a Republic, let's see if you can keep it despite humankind's corrupt nature.'

'Those who give up freedom for safety deserve and will end up with neither.'

[-] 1 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 5 years ago

Ha, ha, ha. A scientific study of human nature? Not for me thanks. Too many people live in an expert mediated reality. Panglossianism is a recipe for defeat.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

The studies point out the basic and most obvious fact: humans are a tribal animal and would not have survived otherwise.

Tribes competed, yes. They still do, obviously, as tribes, as groups, not as individuals in constant war with each other. There is evidence of this around you everywhere in your own life.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

But as tribes found that they could be even more successful healthier prosperous working together that also happened - a joining in common cause - not always - but stronger more flexible more versatile when able to be inclusive.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Thus nations are a conglomerate of tribes?

The planet has grown small, fast. There is one world now comprised of nations, comprised of tribes. There is no margin for infighting any longer. Just as tribes evolved into nations, nations must evolve into a species. All resistance, to this simple and blatant fact, needs education. Religion will resist as hard as ignorance and must be met with more education.

Thanks for the reply.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Thx for the short discussion.

We have grown past the point where the individual can easily control out of personal physical menace.

Hence religion and it's twisting to suit those in power. This also not so successful as the population gets educated.

Are we finally gonna enter the day of addressing issues?

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Thanks back.

I cannot see any other course for people aside from addressing issues we all share. There are a great amount of beautiful ideas forcing their way into mainstream regardless of the resistance given them by those wishing to retain control.

The world is changing faster each day. Praise to good ideas.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Absolutely - they ( good ideas ) may make some angry ( damn you are making me consider this issue and that means more of my attention and likely some work ) At 1st - but if those who get angry take a moment to consider - they may see that in the long run "IT IS BETTER FOR ALL - EVEN THEM" and they can see that it is not additional work just work that has been shifted - now to a good healthy course for ALL.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Thanks again, and I look forward further conversation.

Example: A small nation governed by a corrupted minority, experiences disproportionate wealth distribution. The wealthy are constantly in danger of rebellion and thus expend vast resources oppressing the population, so as to retain control. If the wealthy were to reinvest in the very people of that nation there would be less and less support for rebellion and the wealthy would be made safer as a direct result.

Only a psycho would disagree.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Closed loop economy - no waste - pump the power back into the system - all parts of the process get the needed resources and attention to be maintained in healthy complimentary operation.

Only the GREEDY can not SEE.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Excellent use of the use of the term 'closed loop system'.

The greedy are afraid. Plain and simple.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Thx - perspective - proper perspective.

[-] 1 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 5 years ago

Then why has liberalism lost out ever since WWII to the rise of the corpoRAT backed security state? FDR and the Nuremberg trials were the high point, it's been downhill since then.

Moreover, you don't even mention psychopaths. There can be no realistic fight against corruption and evil without taking them into account.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

I see little to no difference between political parties. "Liberalism" remains unregistered with me. As for the rise of corporate rule, your point is clear. May I point out that a corporation is comprised of many people. Tribal?

As for psychos.. Was there truly a place in the cave for those who endangered the whole with selfish ideology?

[-] 1 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 5 years ago

In the cave they were much easier to recognize -- there were essentially no strangers. Today they have the benefit of distance and become politicians, judges and generals (not to mention banksters).

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

As stated to DKA... Hoarding wealth as a means to control the masses is an obvious last ditch effort by psychos. Any anonymity enjoyed by psychos previously, becomes less and less available to them. Hiding in the crowd is no longer an option when the wealthy can be easily identified and herded.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

AHhhh and therin lies the rub - if that psycho was strong physically - the psycho often times became the leader through personal power. If weak they tried to find a strong individual to attach to and manipulate.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Well described scenario indeed.

I refuse to ascribe to any ideology that eliminates, the good of the whole, from the equations of governance. It may very well be that the selfish, psychopathic elements have seemingly gained an advantage, it is by their own very nature that they shall fall, directly as a result of an inherent inability to assess and empathize with other human beings.

While psychos may have been useful at times as leaders, the time for longer range thinkers has come and those new thoughts must be allowed the same support the psychos have historically been given.

One step further... By consolidating wealth, psychos feel they are limiting resistance rather than making of themselves a clear and easily defined target.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

They can not so easily hide in plain sight any-longer.

Now is time for another step forward in the growth of humanity/society/fellowship - recognizing issues that effect all and working on them for a positive solution for all. Inclusive not exclusive.

[-] 1 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Here are a couple of very simple ideas that effect everyone and will never go away.



[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

And as complex or as simple as one may wish to make. Could be totally low tech - and still remain a closed loop - as we need to use closed loop systems. Nothing set aside to be dealt with later - deal with everything in a system as it happens - rather then let something go and say - we'll get to it later.

Simple is generally the better direction to go - cleaner operation through design - cleaner maintenance through design - simple expansion through design.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Exactly. The ideas above-mentioned are so simple it will not be possible to remove them from use once implemented on a grand scale.

Clean drinking water and food, are mighty important to all people. Any attempt to restrict access to these basic necessities is folly.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

The removal of basic causes of conflict - this is how we move forward in human growth - in growth of fellowship and the ability to accept differences as they do not offer threat/competition - just differences/spice. Remove scarcity of the resources for healthy life for ALL.

[-] 2 points by FawkesNews (1290) 5 years ago

Religion, as a source of conflict, will resist forward human growth. It must be surmounted, in order than mankind persevere. It will be surmounted as a source of control, that is inevitable.


[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Religion is a man made construct put in place by those who use it to maintain power control.

Kardashev scale - something to consider - if we can not master proper clean healthy use of what we have right here on earth - likely we will never need to worry about stage 3.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

Yes that will have to be enough. We cannot be sure if he found transcendence but since he did this song he claims to have found true happiness with his son Sean & wife Yoko.

I hope so.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Perhaps - it is a good thought.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 5 years ago

"god is a concept by which we measure our pain"


[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33633) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

A deeper understanding of self - a deeper understanding of all? JL was always looking. Did he find a point of transcendence? I don't know as the song can properly express the self discovery - but perhaps it is enough to put the thought out there for others to examine.

Would it be correct to declare(?) - I Am What I Am And That Is All That I Am. or : I Am I - Always Have Been Always Will Be.

Can one understand - I am I - then extend that understanding to everyone else(?) - understanding the same in them as in self(?) - can this engender acceptance of other as OK? or can it engender a truthful search for understanding self and other?