[seahorse]

Its with great sadness that I, a lawyer of 15 years now, a boy raised by his own personal Atticus Finch, a boy that once swore swore as a paratrooper to uphold and defend a Constitution, who swore again as an attorney to uphold that same Constitution, must now confess that that same Constitution no longer acts to limit the powers of the Government, but limits instead the will of the people to govern themselves, thus allowing the government to run amok.

The Constitution was a novel idea, a novel idea to create a contract between a government and its people. It was a contract whose intent was to protect its people by defining the powers of government in a written document, and in so doing, restrict the powers of the government to encroach upon the freedoms of the people who ulitimate constituted that government. It was the idea that government is of the people, by the people for the people, reduced to writing, so that the powers of that government would be restricted, preserving the rights and freedoms of the people who constituted it.

Although novel in design, the ultimate effect of having a government reduced to writing meant that ultimately the people would be forced to look to its "limited government" to interpret the Contract that attempted to limit that same government. Is it any surprise then that the Presidents created by that Constitution have issued thousands upon thousands of executive orders, an authority not expressed in the Constitution, which also have the effect of law but are never approved by Congress? Is it any surprise that the Courts have ruled taxpayers do not having standing to sue their own government? Is it any surprise that the Courts have ruled there is no duty of the police to protect its citizens? Is it any surprise that the 4th Amendment is subject now to an undeclared war on terror? That the Patriot Act and various other legislation passed in the war on terror allows domestic spying without search warrants? Is it any surprise then that banks, regulated by our government, can limit withdrawals, place holds on safety deposit boxes etc? Any surprise at legislative "earmarks"? Any surprise that Congressmen always vote themselves pay raises, won't pass campaign reform, have free healthcare and wonderful retirement plans? These unexpressed powers and benefits of government service should not come as a surprise when it is the government that interprets its own "limited" powers.

In the end, reducing the government to a written Constitution did not limit our government. It did, however, turn the idea of subsequent generations away from the idea government is by the will of the people, to the idea that they had created a limited government that would, through benevolence for its people, restrict itself.

Our forefathers and our present generation falsely assume that government, that power, can be restricted or limited by a piece of paper. Reducing to writing the idea that power can be so easily restricted only acts to restrict the ideas of the people that read and believe the false notion that power can be so easily restricted. The false belief that gov't power can be so easily limited by a written Constitution has become a yoke around the necks of generations of Americans from which the nation can be pulled by the special interest that subvert it.

[basil_hayden]

Don't lose faith yet, seahorse.

Life is easy in the USA for the vast majority in comparison to the rest of the world, in general.

As long as this fact prevails, no changes will be made, right up to total fascism. The perception is that yielding our freedoms keeps the illusion running another day or two.

When things change, they'll change quickly, and instead of trying to work out a new system, we have the Constitution to fall back on, a roadmap to correct things. It's called revolution, and it will happen, as sure as peak oil, sunrises and sunsets.

[seahorse]

Basil,

I agree that if there is any remaining benefit of our Constitution, it is the hope that someday, someone will read it like a bit of Plato, and that it will act as a roadmap for some new beginning, but right now, the Constitution limits nothing but the people who still believe that it limits the government. The yoke of our own simple belief that governmental power can be so easily limited has worn us out to the point that a Nazis like Joseph Goebbels can waive it like a flag and rally the people around the cry of "Patriotism!"

Basil, I know you understand this, but for others who don't, search the Constitution to see if you can find where it allows for the creation of enforcement agencies like the FBI, ATF, DEA, Dept of Homeland Security, "ICE" to name a few. Of course you won't find the power to create those agencies expressed in the Constitution; those aren't express powers, they are "implied" powers of our government, powers that must be implied by Constitution so that that our government may govern for our own benefit, or so they say. You be the judge, for it is your government, you are the interpretor, not them.

[billp]

We are trying to do something about constitutional matters: link with some internet viz help.
regards, bill

[ChicknLittle]

link and link

Please read this incredible link (developing story) revealing how the Bush administration interprets presidential power... With the help of a compliant OLC (John Woo) and DOJ the president has claimed a position of unrestrained power... Essentially, he makes laws (executive orders), can change laws without notice, and is able to determine the extent of his power without oversight. Oh, and the Department of Justice answers to him. : (

You can't make this stuff up... Still, the constitution provides a framework for pushing back, IF the Congress and Senate see the crisis and act...

[seahorse]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')till, the constitution provides a framework for pushing back, IF the Congress and Senate see the crisis and act...

[pup55]

I think the current action, that is to say "rope-a-dope inaction" by the democrats is a deliberate strategy.

They know that despite a 70 percent disapproval rating, the US public has no stomach for a Clinton-like impeachment trial that will probably fail and accomplish nothing except envigorate the right wingers.

They also know that if they bring the government to their knees, like Gingrich in 94, they run the risk of ticking off the public and getting thrown out.

Their real goal is to take both houses of congress by veto and filibuster proof majorities in '08, and the white house if possible. Then, they can un-do most of the bad stuff, do whatever investigations they need to right the wrongs, and move forward. If they get really "lucky", the stock market will collapse during the next 11 months, helping them even more.

What they do not know is that there is a sizeable population that is so ticked off at the current mess that they want to hang somebody, at least Cheney, that they will not vote for a Democrat for dog catcher because they appear too "spineless".

So the risk is, they will continue on with the "Nancy Pelosi Battered Woman" strategy, and the strategy will backfire. By being "accommodating" the public will relate it to "spinelessness". Their calculation is that they can win more votes by resisting minimally, and trying to convince the public that it was all the republicans' fault.

If this is the case, it will probably be one of the most gigantic political miscalculations in the last 50 years, and no one knows what a catastrophe it will be for the constitution and the general rule of law.

[Aaron]

Great thread.

The threat and use of physical force has always been the only real power... And still is.

Without regard to the "trappings" of any particular system.

Combat... It's what we do.

No agreement can change that.

[Heineken]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('basil_hayden', 'L')ife is easy in the USA for the vast majority in comparison to the rest of the world.

[TheTurtle]

Well put, Seahorse. I too have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic.

The Founding Fathers recognized that liberty had to be renewed regularly. We, the People, have not been keeping up our end of the contract.

The 2nd Amendment is our reminder of the power we possess (as Aaron alludes). Ironically, the SCOTUS will rule on the 2nd Amendment this coming year, with a final verdict predicted for June 08. I see that as the make or break point. If they rule correctly, it will remind the People that we have teeth and not only the right, but the obligation to bite. If they rule incorrectly, it could trigger the failsafe mechanism that the framers of the Constitution included in the document.

But it could just as easily shut that failsafe mechanism off for all time if there are no patriots ready to act upon it when called to do so.

Unfortunately, I cannot see clearly which way it will swing. But I have my suspicions and think of Orwell's closing thought in 1984, "a boot stamping down on a human face -- forever.":cry:

Of course, I think Nature has much larger things in store for us in the very near future, so the issue is probably moot.

[seahorse]

Turtle, keep in mind that when the 2nd Amendment was drafted, there were but three weapons, the musket, cannon, and sabre. Those are old relics. As technology has changed, so have the weapons. The greatest weapon now is the computer, not a rifle. Just look at our current military, it could not operate without computers, but the same is true of society - nothing in our society, commerce or gov't could work without them. So, the weapon posing the greatest threat to society is no longer a rifle, but a computer in the hands of someone who knows how to use it. Think back a few weeks ago to that video showing how a hacker could destroy an electrical generator. Our military now has special units to try to stop hackers.

Unlike guns, the computer is a weapon that can't be confiscated, bc our society literally depends on it to function. Thus, the gov't is in a Catch 22. It must allow people access and training on computers, while also recognizing the computer also poses the greatest threat to the system. So, the greatest threat posed by the people is no longer the rifle under the bed, but a computer on a desk next to the bed. The greatest threat is no longer a "bullet" but a virus unleashed in the system. Just a few people have the ability to literally shut the system down. The Secret Service can plan for snipers, but they can do nothing to prevent a hacker attack, which can literally, come from anywhere in the world.

People simply have to understand that they system is never bigger than themselves, that their power is not limited to a piece of paper or to their rights under the Second Amendment. The power of the people is limited only by their inability to think and see that their power was and always will be within themselves to govern themselves.

[pup55]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'w')e have teeth and not only the right, but the obligation to bite

[seahorse]

Hypothetically of course, biting doesn't mean shooting anyone. One doesn't need a thousand people in the streets, one only needs one computer virus replicating itself anywhere in the system. If the people can't get away from their t.v.s, shut those t.v.s down and get people asking questions.

[TheTurtle]

Seahorse and pup55, I agree with all your points. I'm not saying it's an easily solved problem. In fact, I suggested that it will turn out badly.

I didn't just wake up one morning and decide to be a doomer, you know. There are a great many reasons to be in that camp, IMO. Look at Coyote's excellent Converging Catastrophes thread, for example.

[Heineken]

The Constitution, which is after all just a piece of paper, was drafted during an era in which the freedoms it mandated were physically possible. "Infinite" resources, a tiny population, a vast and mostly uncharted frontier. The erosion of our liberties has paralleled the overstocking of the US with people and the cutting up of its resource base into ever smaller pieces. This trend is reversible only through dieoff; it can't be legislated away.

[basil_hayden]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Heineken', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('basil_hayden', 'L')ife is easy in the USA for the vast majority in comparison to the rest of the world.

[Kingcoal]

If you want to know how our government gets it's authority to do things you need to read the Constitution and then study Supreme Court rulings. The Supreme Court exists to defend the people from over reaching government authority; they really have no other function. That's why the Executive and Legislative branches are always slinging mud at the Judicial Branch. They are always complaining about "activist judges" and Gonzales even went as far to suggest that the Supreme Court is supposed to defer to the Executive Branch on all matters of national security.

In early decisions, the court consistently upheld the right of the Federal government to reign supreme in their jurisdiction. There was an early case called McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) where the judges ruled that in regard to federal power within federal jurisdiction, the end justifies the means. As long as the power is used to accomplish a goal which is within the scope of the Constitution, the means that they use to accomplish that goal don't have to be spelled out in the Constitution. In other words, the Constitution is not a step by step document on how to run the country. It's a guide and as long as the government is within the spirit of that guide and more importantly, within the jurisdictions outlined within, they can do as they see fit.

Jurisdiction is the key phrase here. The thing is, it's always been this way. The feds have always been using pretzel logic to gain jurisdiction, it goes all the way back to the beginning of the country. In fact, I would say that about 90% of the laws and codes that are passed by Congress, if enforced to the letter UNIVERSIALLY (that’s the key term), would be struck down in the Supreme Court. It's like an onion; there are layers of authority that increase as you go towards the center. Once in the center, the law can be enforced to its fullest extent, in the outer rings, only certain aspects can be enforced. There are people, such as public officers, who come completely under all of the terms of the Patriot Act because by swearing the oath of office, they have given up rights in order to receive power and as such come under the complete jurisdiction of the US. In fact, that probably extends to Naturalized Immigrants, because they have sworn an oath of allegiance to the United States.

You can’t sue the government or more specifically, government officers, because that would be interfering in the performance of their duties. The only thing you can do is challenge their authority in specific instances. The average modern American is completely ignorant of the workings of jurisdiction and the government likes it that way. I was never taught about it in school and maybe that’s intentional. It’s in the government’s best interest to appear all powerful; it tends to make people more cooperative.

[Heineken]

Life in the US is certainly easy for many, Basil, but I don't think it's a valid generalization. Also, the line between "easy" and "quality" is pretty ambiguous. These are hard terms to define.

In my view, the "average" American has an office job, earns maybe $45,000 a year, is a slave to a mortgage, sits in traffic a lot, battles the crowds at the mall and the supermarket, juggles bills and credit-card debt, runs endless petty errands . . . not my view of "easy" OR "quality."

Anyway, this is getting off topic . . . my fault.

[basil_hayden]

It's not off topic, just a specific example of the problem.

You describe people who made choices, elsewhere there is no choice to make.

[Fishman]

What a massive whine-fest!
Does anyone here ever pick up a history book? Anytime the country has been challenged by war or the threat of war , the president assumes more powers, people grumble, "oh, its the end of the country!, boo, hoo!" The conspiracy folks go crazy. Bush has assumed far fewer powers than most presidents in times past. Damn, I''ll be the first at his memorial in Washington when it gets built in 30 years.
Seahorse, get a real job.