I doubt if Stengel, or others at Time (or any other so-called professional journalist) has ever deigned to read the Federalist Papers. Won't fit with the paradigm of a "living" constitution.

If times have changed, why didn't they use Amendments to change it?

We should introduce amendments for everything that they want and see how it goes.

One amendment I suggest is that lesser judges who are overturned a number of time, thus not doing their job of gatekeeper to the Supreme Court, should lose their job until reappointed by Congress.

Supreme Court Judges should be compelled as the President to report from time to time to Congress and to answer questions put forward.

Tough questions must be asked.

Thank you, Mr. Alexander. To borrow the words of Jeddadiah Sprinfield, "Your words Enbiggen us." and they lend strength to stand tall on liberty's battlefield statists which are legion here in D.C.

Time magazine is so far out of touch and so liberal, the Constitution is just as important today as it was when signed

WIsh i could give but due to the Obama ecconomy there is little to work with. They all seem to have "forgotten" that words mean something(Rush Limbaugh)

Regarding Mr. Alexander's comment about Obama deserting his oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution". He has not deserted it. It was never his intention to defend the Constitution in the first place.

I often visit my 81 year-old mother in Texas and see a copy of the latest Time magazine on her coffee table. She is an avid reader and loves to keep up with current events. However, the majority of material to which she subscribes is leftist propaganda. I have had some influence on her, but I grow tired of hearing her repeat the lies that weekly come out of this kind of journalistic trash. She may be too old to change although I will respectfully and lovingly try to help her understand. My only hope is that publications like the Patriot Post will reach enough young minds in this country to turn the tide of socialism. I have already made a donation to your cause. Keep up the good work.

The Constitution of the United States is the contract between the people and it's federal government, and is the SOLE authority they [the federal government] holds over me. If they no long wish to unhold, support and defend the Constitution of the United States, then I'm afraid that they are going to have to govern somebody else....no contract, no power!

Just sent in my contribution. I selected no essential liberty "thank you" (already amply supplied there), but since you probably have Mr. Stengel's address, please feel free to send him my copy.

Thanks for your efforts.

Thank you, Mr. Alexander, for (again) highlighting the assault of the Progressives. Do we need to look deeply into any of the writings of our founders to see that the clear intent of our Constitution was to set limits on a Federal government? All the ills in Washington today were anticipated and warned against, and not in any vague language. James Madison often referred to the necessity of a moral electorate to prevent was has come to pass. No law, no Constitution is going "to matter" without a moral electorate. If we don't change where we're headed, we're going to get where we're going.

The freedom that our Founding Fathers fought for does not matter to Richard Stengal. If the FBI were to arrest him for writing and publishing this article all of a sudden our Constitution would matter to him. Liberals don't believe in freedom until theirs is taken away and then it is too late.

This is one of the many tarnished examples of the valid reasons for me to cancel my 25 year old subscription to the rag called Time magazine about three years ago.

Semper Fidelis

John Wear

Sgt 3rd Tanks

RVN '68 - '69

Times and mores can change, inventions appear, technology can explode, but none of these should have any impact upon the basic morals and ethics of the human race. If we do not follow these tenets we once more sink into barbarianism. These “rules” for our country, the U.S.A., are found in our Constitution. They are the foundation of Liberty upon which this great country was built. If we follow it as was intended by the founding fathers, we should not sink into anarchy or despotism. As morals and ethics are an unchangeable guide for mankind, so our Constitution is an unchangeable guide for our country. Bending rules to one person’s liking, endangers all the rest of us. And any person who takes a solemn vow to follow and protect the Constitution of the United Sates, and then proceeds to subvert it in any way is committing a form of treason and should be removed from office. Let the Constitution stand!

"...Stengel observes that times have changed and that our Founders "did not know about" all the advancements of the present era. Thus he concludes our Constitution must be pliable..."

The intelligentsia’s notion of those things that our Founding Fathers “did not know about” invariably refer to the great scientific advancements that the mind of man has developed over the centuries. The Constitution does not concern itself with things so juvenile. The Constitution is the recording of the rights of man as bestowed by our Creator; for the ignorant: the God of the Bible, and designed to protect free peoples of these States United for all time AND limit the inevitable encroachment on those rights by a government committed to destroying those rights in search of controlling the free people of America.

I just donated to your fundraiser. I get bombarded with requests for support, but with this economy can't do much. I do try to support The Patriout Post simply because you stand firm, supply wonderfully accurate infomation, and do not advertise or bow to pressure. Thank you for all you do!

~Proud Wife of a Retired USAF SMSgt

I fear that defense of our Constitution based on the original intent of the Founders is a defense too easy to refute by intellectually lazy leftists who prefer to define legal constraints in their present context. With all due respect to the Founders, our Constitution is a contract between the government and the governed, and should be defended as any contract that contains provisions for its own amendment. "Progressives" who enjoy encumbering us with new legal mandates or contracts would have a more difficult time evading or redefining the terms of a superior contract -- which is our Constitution.

The part of Jefferson's quote that says ; To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all Constitutional questions...would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy, pretty much says what our problem is today. They are the people who CHANGE the Constitution to suit those in power. Some of their interpertations needed to be put to the people, because that is the only way the Constitution can be changed--by the people. It keeps getting worse as years pass,soon the Conctitution will be worthless, unless the PEOPLE stop them.

There was a time when a man got too big for his britches he was ridden out of town on a rail. It seems now proper that Richard Stengel and the other useful idiots at Time magazine should be ridden, not out of town, but out of the country on a rail. They pose as the literati but are in fact the illiterate ignoramus bunch.

The cover of TIME magazine has long been regarded as (and statisticly proven to be) a contrary indicator for economic conditions by those who follow the discipline of technical analysis in trading and investing. By the time something hits the cover of TIME, the trend they are espousing has already hit its peak. We can only hope TIME's track record holds with their view of the Constitution!

I'm not certain about if this is just a liberal agenda. I am certain the people on this blog have a far better handle on the constitution than most conservative blogs or liberals.

One of the individuals who work for us pointed out the 14th Amendment. If someone can explain it to me in not so opaque terms, it would be much appreciated.

On one hand we have congress who controls the nations purse strings. On the other we have a line that says all debts are moral obligations. Does this mean they have a ticket to raise the debt ceiling (I don't think so) What it does mean is we have to pay our debts and not default. I even found case law from the 30's to support this. Can you see the catch 22 situation?

If (providing I'm reading this correctly,) congress says shut down the president can say continue on thus producing a fiscal crises which congress may have to take legal action and they will be running against the wind and against law.

On the above I asked a law professor on Constitutional law as did members of both parties and apparently we all received basically the same answer.

Can anyone cut through the legalese and provide a straight answer?

Since I just received an email for a donation, I want to pose a question to you--since I can not afford to donate--would you prefer me to unsubscribe from The Patriot Post? I go through things everyday to see what I can cut out to save so I have enough to live on. I have even thought of getting rid of the internet, but then I would just ride around the house on my chair all day. This is my entertainment, because I don't care for TV.

To Harold (Wyatt)

I too have been solicited for a donation, and like you,,,I cannot donate. I recieve at least one threatning letter a week from collection agencies for payment of medical bills my wife incurred from a triple by-pass. The surgery and all Dr.s associated managed to wipe out all our savings and caused us to lose our home and a huge investment, before we could sell out. We now live in an abandoned mobile home on a small lot owned by our son-in-law. SS is our only source of income, and the way it is set up,,,we sometimes have to stretch it out for five (5) weeks. Our income is equivalent to most people's weekly paycheck, and as you know we have had NO RAISE in the last three (3) years.

SO I too will have to un-sunscribe if The Patriot deems it necessary.!

Mr. Wyatt, I have just donated again so that you and other patriots can continue to receive The Patriot Post. "Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker." --John Adams

I have to say, the relevancy of the Constitution is an extremely serious and valid concern.

Due mainly to indoctrinated paradigms via "national" education and media, there is a significant reality that is vastly unnoticed.

Most Americans are citizens of the federal government United States. Meaning we are citizens of the State, United States. As opposed to being Citizens of our respective separate and independent sovereign republic States.

The people were not citizens to the federal government in the original republic of our Founders.

That difference, in fact and in law, is the difference between the (lawful) constitutional republic of our Founders, and the (unlawful) unconstitutional de facto "national" (federal) democracy we participate in today. Remember, governments are instituted by the consent of the governed.

This is the nature of federal citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment as stated by the Supreme Court of the United States : “It is the natural consequence of a citizenship [92 U.S. 542, 551] which owes allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from both. The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government. He owes allegiance to the two departments, so to speak, and within their respective spheres must pay the penalties which each exacts for disobedience to its laws.” U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)

You see? Americans have "voluntarily submitted" (accepted, by tacit consent, citizenship) to this "national" so-called federal form of government. A form of government absolutely contrary to the US Constitution. An anti-republic, "national" democracy form of government.

No longer the republic given us, the republic we could not keep.

And "The citizen cannot complain,".

First, we must understand, we cannot solve a problem we cannot see.

www.pacinlaw.org

Mike

Another broke patriot here. But I believe better days are coming, and I will donate when they do. Thank you.

Obama is supported ny the young, the poor and the ivory tower elite who have never met a payroll. Along with the hordes of illegals they increase daily geometrically.

I have a grandson, radicalized in college, who thinks Obama walks on water. I can do and say nothing that will change him as of now. It will probably be much too late by the time he and his fellow travelers wake up and smell the coffee.

Greece, here we come !!

RE: the 14th Amendment question.

The 14th Amendment federalized citizenship.

In the original constitutional republic of our Founders, the people were not citizens to the federal government.

We are today, citizens of the State, United States. As opposed to Citizens of one of the seperate and independent sovereign republic States.

That difference, in fact and law, is the difference between the original constitutional republic, and the "national" (federal) democracy of today.

www.pacinlaw.org

Mike

@ John Wear

I'm surprised that you hung with them as long as you did. I cancelled my Times subscription 20+ years ago. If I do read that rag, it's only because I've finished the issues of Car & Driver and McCalls magazines while sitting in my Dentist's waiting room and there's nothing else to kill time with.

Semper Fi

2d Tracks

'84-'85

More 14th Amendment:

This is the nature of federal citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment as stated by the Supreme Court of the United States : “It is the natural consequence of a citizenship [92 U.S. 542, 551] which owes allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from both. The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government. He owes allegiance to the two departments, so to speak, and within their respective spheres must pay the penalties which each exacts for disobedience to its laws.” U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)

You see? Americans have "voluntarily submitted" (accepted, by tacit consent, citizenship) to this "national" so-called federal form of government. A form of government absolutely contrary to the US Constitution. An anti-republic, "national" democracy form of government.

No longer the republic given us, the republic we could not keep.

Remember, governments are instituted by the consent of the governed.

www.pacinlaw.org

Mike

I like to point out to my British friends that since they have no constitution, they must "muddle through", in Churchill's phrase, and the outcome is quite uncertain. Also, I like to point out to my Aussie and Canuck friends that their constitutions are gifts from the British parliament, a charmingly chaotic body when viewed on PBS.

Our constitution is what we the people said it is. We are independent of the British Crown and parliament because we said so and we made it stick. Making the constitution stick is a never-ending task.

Outdated Constitution and the Founding Fathers intentions irrelevant? Not honoring Washington’s “sacred obligation” and accepting change by usurpation has put us in jeopardy of our once free government being destroyed just as he predicted. And we’re already dangerously far down that disastrous path.

There’s an old axiom that you can’t eat an elephant whole, so you eat it one bite at a time. Isn’t it so glaringly obvious – even to our “entertain me” culture – that is exactly what is happening to the foundational documents and values of our nation? I know “endowed by our creator” is such a heinous concept to progressives, but it is bedrock solid to the cascade of principles and policies that follow it. There can be no doubt that civilization must rest upon a solid foundation, just like a building or house in the physical sense, if it is to survive in any recognizable form. There would otherwise be only anarchy and complete division. I disagree even metaphorically that our Constitution is only a set of guardrails to keep us on a given road. To the contrary, our Constitution is the road. It provides not only the direction and path, but also a means to alter the destination should the times changes. They are called Amendments. In times of change, turmoil, doubt, division, and even mass stupidity; the Constitution, unlike an entertainment magazine, is ever more relevant.

The President is not supposed to be the most powerful man in the nation, and it wasn't until Kennedy that the President's Office started being the lead on major legislative actions. And every president since Kennedy has taken that power increase and upped the ante with every passing year. Obama is the product of a larger and now long-term problem of bloated Presidential power, but no one should be arguing that Obama is unique.

Just look at Obama's predecessor, George Walker Bush? Was it not Bush who signed the $700 billion bailout? How about the $163 billion "stimulus"? Do you all remember getting a check for $300 or $800 in the mail? Do you recall that the government borrowed that money? And let's not forget VP Cheney who argued that his office was exempt from executive orders because the VP is not part of the executive branch of government...but not part of the legislative branch either??!! Talk about shredding the Constitution.

The Founding Fathers, especially those who wrote the Federalist Papers, did not envision Presidents acting this way. And that goes for Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc...

For "ashamed" (don't be), and Harold Wyatt (never desert a shipmate), got'cha covered.

It is the only thing us and anarchy. Many years ago, mas a young man, I took an oath to defend it. It still apllies today.

Time asks "Does the Constitution Still Matter?"

Does breathing still matter? Does your faith in the creator still matter? Does Freedom still matter?

Asking this question reveals to the reader that Time has decided, along with its liberal socialist allies, that our Constitution stands in the way against the onslaught of freedom depriving policies and regulations and laws, that the left wants to impose on America.

Its not a question of listing more in it to deal with what some call its negative aspects, so the government can do more "for" us.

Its a question of why should we allow a list of alleged government responsibilities to be listed when what those seeking changes or the elimination of the Constitution really mean, they want to have more listed so the government can do more "TO" us!

Each time anything is listed in a Constitution, it invited government to insinuate itself into every aspect of that issue as it affects our lives.

More government means more control. Our founders escaped from countries & political systems that did just that. Their legal systems & their monarchs insinuated their power or control over others. And they expanded that control at every opportunity.

Is it any wonder people fled to America, even when we still were part of the British Empire? Is it any wonder why our ancestors decided they wanted to separate from that Empire's oppressive rule?

Freedom means, the government is required to stay out of our lives except where protection of the nation is involved. All else is extraneous & abusive!

Time has decided for itself that 'we the people' are incapable of managing ourselves so Time & its liberal allies want to imply, we should permit our betters to rule over us.

Yeah, Right! Sure we will! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

to RK Sprau, some of your post quoted, "Can anyone cut through the legalese and provide a straight answer?" It seems that exercising your 2nd amendment rights [learning to shoot straught] may be the only way to cut through the legalese.

Sorry folks but it's time to wake up...our Republic and Constitution are at the point of near certain death. This current crowd of neo-comms and obamunists are attempting to put the final nails in the coffin of Liberty and too few are rising in opposition.

As Americans we need to decide how to end this constitutional crisis with the usurper illegally occupying our executive branch. EVERYBODY knows what defines a 'natural born citizen', namely a citizen of parents who were BOTH citizens themselves, and yet BOTH parties and millions of voters seem to dismiss the issue. Let's face it, we have an illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL government. We must demand an end to this crisis.

Our once free-enterprise capitalist system has been allowed to reach the point of near bankruptcy thanks to the policies of BOTH parties. The elites of the liberal establishment have purposely ruined our economy so that they can establish their globalist agenda. Mark my words, their agenda does not include a dominant American power. Our Constitution is a stumbling block toward their goals so they want to redefine it as much as possible as to make it meaningless.

We must end this Constitutional crisis and resusitate the flames of Freedom and Liberty before it is too late to do so.

Now is the time for true Patriots to rise to the occasion and stand in fidelity to our Constitution. Only our Constitution can provide the God-given rights we need to be truely free.

RE: Time's article "Does It [the Constitution] Still Matter" by Richard Stengel.

I think Mr. Stengel has either been watching too much Star Trek or he's intentionally pushing the false rationale of the Left. I almost filled my pants when I read that he concludes that our Constitution isn't up to snuff because it doesn't take into account "all the advancements of the present era" that the Founders "did not know about". I'm sorry but this warped thinking is like saying our laws against murder don't cover murder with a phazer, that they only cover murder by strangulation, by blunt force trauma, or by a knife. That's ridiculous; and Mark Alexander is right to suggest that Mr. Stengel learn a little about the Constitution before he again attempts to write about it.

Our Constitution covers our form of government which impacts, and has influence upon, the social structure of humanity here in America. As such, our Constitution has nothing to do with the advancements created my modern society. The philosophical concepts that serve as the foundation for our Constitution would work equally well for cave men who have no advancements. This is because despite Mr. Stengel's "advancements" of modern society, we're still a bunch of cavemen at our core.

Mr Stengel should be ashamed of himself, regardless of whether he's ignorant or (more likely) contemptuous of our Constitution. Mr. Alexander has caught Stengel with his pants down.

What a great 4th of July breath of fresh air! Time magazine is obviously anti american in their thinkng. Thank you for your truth.

A now deceased relative once said, "That Statue Of Liberty standing in the harbour is going to turn around, see whats' going on in this country of ours, throw that torch into the water and swim back to France."

The two things most often displayed by Progressives, both in Government and the(MAINSTREAM)Press, is their contempt for restrictions on "bigger" government, and, their belief that the Constitution is a living document. I'm not quite sure where their mindset developed to entertain such ignorant thinking, one might conclude they missed a semester or two that dealt with the Revolutionary War period in our nation's history. Today the Constitution, Liberty, and Freedom are under assault from internal as well as external forces to rid the world of the shining light upon the hill. Patriots will prevail in vanquishing those who would rather have rule of man, than rule of law. We must give thanks to God for allowing the likes of Obama to come into power, so that a spark has been lit that will ignite true lovers of Liberty. Though the wallet is short a few dollars, I will send along what I can, what your publication provides is very important to us all. God bless!

On arguing with Stengel and anyone else who says and believes that the Constitution doesn't matter anymore, if we do they'll win any argument with them due to their greater experience in blowing smoke up people's tailpipes. If I had a bird I wouldn't offend it by lining its cage with Time, Newsweek, or any of the other leftist "newsrags".

Mr. Alexander, your article on the Constitution is accurate and as excellent as usual. Nevertheless, even a hint that anyone should support a new Constitutional Convention is disturbing. The Statists would totally destroy what’s left of the Rule of Law. I fear for the country, but such a convention cannot be the answer.

Thought I would go to the Time website. Clicked on the article read said article. Went to comment about this "article" and lo and behold! "comments on this page are closed" Read some of them and you will know why. HAHAHHAHHAHAH!

Problem is, the left refuses to admit that the things they worry about the Constitution "not taking into account" because they didn't exist 235 years ago are actually BEYOND the Constitution's purview. "The Founders didn't know about cell phones, or the internet, or ..." Doesn't matter, the Founders knew about LIBERTY and freedom of speech. How that speech is delivered is irrelevant. "The Founders didn't know about assault rifles or machine guns or automatic pistols or..." Doesn't matter, the Founders knew that everyone has a right to protect him or herself, especially from the encroachment of government. How that protection is practiced is irrelevant.

Perhaps someone should pose the following question to Time Magazine and Mr. Stengel;

"If, as you imply, through your article sir, the Constitution is today irrelevant... Then what force of law binds the 'United States' to the union? Given that the Constitution (adopted and ratified as a replacement to the former Articles of Confederation) is acknowledged as the foundation of the nation, the contract amongst the several states to join together in operation as a single nation within the community of nations, what then binds us together? One may then reasonably conclude - If the Constitution is irrelevent, so too then is the union. Each state is then free to go it's own way. Perhaps joining in union or confederation with such other states, whose people and government adhere to and reflect similar principles and allegiances as their own."

No. The Constitution is not irrelevant and neither is the union (so far). We the People just need to, once again, do what is necessary to set things aright. The District of Columbia simply needs a thorough cleaning and tune-up. Then perhaps the car will take us straight down the road, instead of from ditch to ditch.

God Save the Republic!

Regarding Time Magazine's denigrating article on our Constitution, were you aware that for two years ('04-'06) the author, Richard Stengel, was president and CEO of the National Constitution Center, responsible for training journalists, students, and teachers about this document he so little values. My word!

On a slightly different note. I can well imagine the salivating of the neomarxists as they took their first look at the cover and how they would so love to shred that document.

Time Magazine is still in business?

"Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it."

But why would such an enlightened person as the managing editor of Time be bothered to read something as old as scripture, for to believe it to be truth is to yield to moral law and a moral lawgiver, and thus a narrow view of intent, which was the obvious goal of the framers.

Post modern man is hell-bent to widen the road to perdition. I see everyday the truth of Paul's writings in Romans chapter 1 coming to fruition. What is particularly disturbing is that the framers wrote volumes about their intent, they did not operate in a clandestine manner, they wrote it all down and left a tremendous body of evidence....oh, I forgot they were a bunch of old white guys, what would they know?

Having just sent enough to cover my out-of-work kid's July rent.....can't have the babies living under a bridge...I must postpone any donation to the current fundraising effort.

This highly educated, and formally successful, young person has been unable to find work - and must submit daily applications(even if none get a response) to qualify the family for daycare and state health benefits....can't apply for jobs dragging the kids along....!

BTW, when/if a job is obtained, the 'benefits' mustbe repaid to the state.....really tough to ever again know financial security.

I barely recognize my country anymore.

I never read Time Magazine. I frequently read and consult the Contistution. I do not believe that I am missing anything.

Stengel was a classmate at Princeton back in '77. He was FUBAR then and has not changed since. I read his diatribe and heard his interview on the same. I think he was inebriated or otherwise suffering acute cerebral hypoxia. His responses were so profoundly ignorant as not even rising to the prospect of "genius subterfuge" as Alexander put it.

So time magazine thinks the constitution is outdated. Isn't this the same magazine that once had Adolph Hitler on it's cover as "man of the year'/

Question is - Does TIME still matter? I personally think not!

We can't be surprised at the latest bit of unmitigated gall by the left to twist our founding documents to their own nefarious ends. I won't hold my breath waiting for Mr. Stengel to aquaint himself with the 10th Amendment instead of spouting that the Constitution doesn't restrain gov't. authority. I almost lost my cookies when I read that line.

To comment on your rebuttal, your line "Stengel and his Leftist cadres know their agenda would never pass a Constitutional Convention..." is a little off the mark. We don't want a constitutional convention. Can you imagine the possibility of ACORN, Big Labor, the ACLU, the Sierra Club, etc. getting their grubby little paws into a position of amending our most cherished documents?? Perish the thought.

In any event, this debate we're having over the Constitution was a long time coming, and sorely needed. And I am SO glad the Patriot Post is helping to lead our side. Thanks for all you do.

Ross Perot advocated a constitutional Convention and that is the reason he did not get my vote.

When I was a left winger I bought in to the idea of a "living document" re: the constitution. Now the very term "democracy" when spoken by a republicRAT makes me shudder since the next step down is socialism , then Marxism/ communism with the state taking the place of God. Many want the Federal gumMINT to be god it seems to me.

IN GOD WE TRUST ! not politicians.

Well, the Constitution is in good company. Liberals malign God in the same way.

If the "Rule of Men" was so good, then we made a big mistake in choosing sides in WWI, WWII, Korea, VietNam, and subsequent "conflicts".

The Constitution is relevant. However, whether or not it is a living document is moot. The intent has been changed and getting back to the original intent will be very difficult.

Leftists love to say that the Founders didn't know what kind of advances would be made and therefore the Constitution is irrelevant or "living".

What they ignore is the genius and diving inspiration of the Founders. They knew that the general nature of man does not change. That is why we needed and still need the US Constitution.

If the constitution is a living document, why have one at all? The British do not have a written constitution, and look how wonderful everything is there.

TO: RK Sprau

RE: the debt problem connundrum

I think the answer to your question is that both the congress and the administration would have the moral obligation to pay off our debt. This illustrates what I consider to be the fact that the way in which America currently raises revenue for government is faulty. As a matter of practice, it's similar to a shell game, or perhaps trying to hit a moving target. Each time congress over-spends, they're inclined to raise taxes to cover it, but they're simultaneously not inclined to raise taxes because they know the people will get angry, AND they know that raising taxes will reduce economic growth, inhibiting our ability to pay the debt. AND, they don't want to cut spending after just authorizing the spending! So there's a catch-22 for you.

In my opinion, our current taxation method perpetually puts the nation's fiscal health in jeopardy. I don't think congress should be able to pass bills that spend money, and then go out later to look for the money to pay for it. That's absurd policy. As a side point, and for similar reasons, I also don't think congress should be able to create and pass law without the law first passing Constitutional muster. Every time unconstitutional law (or new law that conflicts with other existing laws) gets passed, people can become victims of this bad law until the law gets challenged and overturned. And though it may indeed get overturned, the victims often remain victims.

I think we need congress' spending authority to be sharply curtailed. As it exists today, it's way too open-ended. I'm not going to do it now, but I have posted to this column before, a basic plan that I think would improve things immensely. Problem is, we would need to get out of debt before the plan could be enacted, because by its nature, it doesn't allow for deficit spending. And the pessimist in me doubts whether we will ever become debt-free.

The leftist intelligensia have made it a hallmark of their agenda to weaken both the authority of God and the U.S. Constitution. By taking away God as an absolute being and making Him a being of swaying opinion, they have pronounced Him "dead". By working to take away the Constitution's absolute authority, they hope it will "die" as well.

To: RK Sprau

Re: a little more on the debt problem

There's another relevant and very important point I meant to make about our debt situation.

As I said previously, when congress over-spends, they're conflicted about raising taxes to cover it, and they don't want to cut the programs that they enacted, especially entitlement programs, because they don't want to be indian-givers. Who would like a Santa Claus who takes gifts away?

Consequently, congress typically raises taxes in some way, either on businesses, or by limiting a deduction here or there, or by raising the higher marginal rates, etc.

Just look at the process that began in 2006 after control of congress went to the Democrats. Pelosi and Reid started spending and Bush didn't veto anything. The debt started to ramp up. You can see this for yourself by doing an internet search for charts on government spending. Then Obama gets elected and he, of course, contributes his efforts for even more government spending. Again, charts you can find online show a ramp up in government spending after 2006, followed by a sharp spike in government spending after 2008 when Obama came in. The slope of that spike is similar to the spike that occurred at the onset of our involvement in WW2. That is how rapidly our government of fools have been spending our money! Anyway, to go on, now that America is more focused on our debt (and rightfully so), aided by the Tea Party genesis, Obama and the Democrats are in trouble. We now understand that they are all about big government, income redistribution, and fostering dependency on government. And what is Obama's tactic with us? He says this money is spent and implies that it is a done deal and is therefore not changeable (despite him being the man of change), AND HE SAYS WE ALL HAVE TO PITCH IN AND SACRIFICE. And that obviously means paying more taxes if these immoral government programs aren't to be cut. So then the go-along get-along Republicans are being urged to compromise. I tell you, compromise is seldom a good policy; and compromising with immoral policy is downright bad policy. Ideally, Obama and the Democrats want to keep all their big-government dependency programs and to tax the private sector to the hilt, just as if this were the Soviet Union. BUT, they will be ok if the Republicans compromise - meaning that Obama and the Democrats will be ok with cutting one or two programs AND getting some tax increases.

Think about that process. Each time the government over-spends, followed by an outcry by the American taxpayers and the fiscally prudent legislators, we get demands for corrective steps. Then the Republicans compromise with the Democrats, which always ends in more entitlement programs and more taxes.

Is it any wonder why government spending is hovering around 40% of GDP??? No wonder at all.

Check out the chart at: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html

I'll point out these things:

1) The spike during WW2.

2) The spike beginning around 2006. Compare the upward slopes of both those spikes. They're almost the same. And we're not into any kind of war activity in any way as big as WW2!!!

3) The drop and levelling off that occurred beginning in 1994 when the Republicans took control of congress and extending up until they lost control in 2006.

The facts and figures tell the story of Liberal mismanagement of our government. You just have to look for them.

To: RK Sprau

Re: one more point on the chart.

Look at the overall incline of the chart from 1903 through 2010. Imagine fitting a gradual curve through all the peaks and valleys, in order to illustrate the overall trend. Trying to visualize the curve, according to the chart, government spending was at around 7% of GDP in 1903. By 2010, the gradual curve would conservatively be around 37% of GDP. This is a 30-point increase over 107 years, or in other words, our government spending has increased, on average, by 4% per year over those 107 years.

If we had an appropriate check on the growth of government, that number should be zero. Any positive number is bad.

Thank all of you for your support, I will continue following the wonderful writings on the Patriot Post. Things will get better as soon as we can vote out those in power at this time.

I think just as if not more important to read are the anti-federalist papers. It shows how the founders struggled with too much government even during the infancy of the Constitution's framing.

Dear Mark & staff;

First off;

Have a great Independence Day; thank you for your extensive research & work re: the Essential Liberty.

The Founding Fathers are smiling & nodding.

As usual, your essay is spot on. Your expose of the ignorance/arrogance of the so-called MSM is essential to keep our resolve. They are a disgrace to their profession & to the country. I quit reading NYT, Time, et al, after but a several weeks in this country (30 years ago) & got my teeth into National Review & other intellectually honest reading (Cogito, ergo sum - simple as that).

Stengel is a prime example of a soulless, vacuous, core-less & haughty creature of the Black Pit (the Founding Fathers are having seizures!). Thank you for teaching me a new American idiom "swapping spit with a jackass" - priceless! My modus vivendi is the same.

As I mentioned before, I was taught at an early age the 'American experiment' by my father, a brilliant, conservative scientist & an atheist. He just skipped the Creator. In his youth, all Czech children had to study the US Constitution at the age 10 (1935) in school! He got infected w/ the Liberty bug at that tender age & so did I.

Looking into his US mag 'The Enthusiast' (Harley Club) in the 50's as a scrawny (due to starvation) boy, I thought the handsome & strong men & the happy, gorgeous bike-babes were from another planet. Of course, my dad was punished by the Red regime for riding a Harley & listening to Am. jazz (even Mickey Mouse, jeans & all things 'made in the US' were strictly forbidden; we still call the Stalin's rein of terror the Dark Ages) to hard labor.

In my book, both parties are guilty of dereliction of duty even though a large part of the Dem party is now a radical, militant, amoral, leftist menace; too many in the GOP establishment are but fellow travelers or onlookers re: the destruction of our Constitution & Republic.

Let us not forget that 1st bailout by 'Dubbya' at the end of his last term in October 2008. I'd say that 800 Billion $$ is pretty darn close to a Trillion. Oh, how about the 'no child left behind', the DHS, !TSA!, 40% growth of the Fed bureau-c-rats? Ain't he a GOP "Good ol' boys club" sorta chap? Did the GOP (w/ the exception of President R. W. Reagan) do anything in the last 50 years to defund or abolish any & all these frivolous & wasteful pork projects/orgs/rulings? I answer for you: Nope, nada, zilch, zero! Only now, tnx mostly to the Tea Party, we hear, !talk! re: such 'radical' proposals.

We'll see what is really going to get !done! in 2013 if we have the change of the W.H. occupants (read Invaders, the Body Snatchers, the Barbarian Hordes, ad nauseam). The vast, deep, broad & daunting damage to the very foundation & fabric of our Republic done just by the unholy triumvirate of Carter/Clinton/Obama will take decades to repair & rectify. And only if we get to the W.H. a true Constitutional Conservative that will enact the essential changes 'brevi manu.' That's a very long shot.

However, I, as a fiercely Independent Constitutional Conservative , it is my duty to set the record straight. After all, this is a Patriotic, not Partisan platform & forum.

Hi everybody;

I forgot these two famous quotes:

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Winston Churchill

"Communism has proven beyond any shadow of doubt that it is completely unfit for human society. Communism works only in heaven, where they don't need it, and in hell, where they've already got it."

Ronald W. Reagan

I know both to be true, for a fact.

Happy Independence Day y'all.

I saw a quote once...Can't remember by who but it went somthin like this: People are not born stupid, education makes them that way.

Stengel got the best stupid that money can buy.

@ Robert of Prague - thanks for your perspective.

James Madison, Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788: "...If that "LATITUDE" of "CONSTRUCTION" which he contends for were to take place with respect to the "sweeping clause" (Article VI), there "WOULD" be room for those "HORRORS".

But it gives "NO" "supplementary" power. It "ONLY" enables them to execute the "DELEGATED POWERS". "IF" the "delegation" of their powers be "safe", no possible inconvenience can arise from this clause. >>>>"It is at most "BUT" explanatory". For when any power is "given", its delegation >>>>"necessarily" involves "AUTHORITY" to make laws to execute it."

Mr. PENDLETON. "...With respect to the necessity of the "TEN MILES SQUARE" (i.e. Washington DC) being superseded by the subsequent clause, which gives them power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers "VESTED" by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof, I understand that clause as NOT going a "SINGLE STEP BEYOND" the "DELEGATED powers". What can it act upon? Some power "given by 'THIS' Constitution". If they should be about to pass a law in consequence of this clause, they must pursue some of the "DELEGATED powers", but can by >>>"NO MEANS" depart from them, >>>(N)OR "ARROGATE" >>>"ANY NEW" powers; for the >>>PLAIN LANGUAGE of the clause is, to give them power to pass laws in order to give "effect" to the >>>>>>>"DELEGATED" powers"."

The federal government is limited to the DELEGATED powers and NO power can be assumed or arrogated beyond those granted them in the "ORIGINAL COMPACT" by ANY means; Nor can the state's legislatures act on the federal legislative's behalf through mandates or other means to "accomplish the same end"; As that would allow the federal government, or any one or number of states, to dictate "unlimited decrees" (as a "living" document would allow) to enslave the rest:

In Republics, "Authority", in a government can only be granted in the "ORIGINAL COMPACT" that formed it. We are a Republic(S), "presently" 50 independent state nations with independent compacts plus a single limited federal COMPACT; NOT a total Democracy(S) whether federal or state.

The US Constitution Matters, because it is the Original Compact that limits the federal government, it is to them the "Authority" that restricts them.

American Patriot Party.CC

http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

Time Magazine's headline: "The Constitution, Does It Still Matter?"

MY headline: "Time Magazine, Does It Still Matter?"

As so many have so rightly stated - or implied - the Constitution is the CONTRACT the We the People have stated how the government MAY act. It is NOT a document to define how we elect our "leaders!" It IS a document that defines how we elect our CIVIL SERVANTS! It's high time the We the People learn their rightful place as the CREATOR of the government - rather than submit to the lie that we are SUBJECTS to it. The party that is SUBJECT to the Constitution is the government it defines that the We the People ALLOW to exist and perform in the capacities described therein and the offices which the same people hold. The Constitution is not so much about rendering authority TO the elected, but about how the We the People ALLOW some to hold an office that maintains only SOME authority over other aspects of government... NOT the We the People. The We the People are in authority over ALL! Until we learn that, we do nothing but spin our gears!!!!

As any average hardworking American can figure out we have created this "beast" by our poor voting or lack there of. Only when we wake up and VOTE these people out of office will we ever have a chance to save our beautiful country!!!

Please bear in mind that vague references to the Constitution, which Constitution-hating judges are notorious for, are worthless imo. Patriots need to start referring specifically to Section 8 of Article I, Article V, and the 10th Amendment.

Oh yes indeed! There is much talk by politicians and private citizens about the validity of the US Constitution and yet, may I ask: Where is the beef?

Yes, while the Founding Fathers are and have been shaking and weeping bitterly in their graves for many many decades if not over a century, in a figure of speech! How about these words spoken so long ago? "Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty". By George Washington. So for decades America's imperialistic military might has been circling the globe and very sadly while at the same time another nation of illegals has simply just walked in to where now their language is treated even legally equal to English everywhere one looks to where now one has to choose between English or Spanish when even calling governmental offices, right? "No pecuniary consideration is more urgent than the regular redemption and discharge of the public debt: on none can delay be more injurious or an economy of time more valuable". By George Washington while now America is actually in full bankrupt condition while fighting wars is becoming the norm and costing trillions, right? The US Constitution is no more respected in practice and therefore it is the great lie of our time to even claim by someone that it is still practiced by America. This 4th of July America should go on its knees and ask forgiveness from the Founding Fathers, instead of the yearly bragging celebration by the country of the free. America has enslaved itself and unless a turnaround happens soon, hell is America's next stop! I rest my case for now!

I canelled my subscription of the left wing rags called Time and Newsweek. Long before my subscriptionns ran out they were left unread on the coffe table except for occasions when I was in need of amusement. It's a shame, as they were once decent publications.

Perhaps since Time Magazine has decided that the constitution is out of date and not revelant, that part of the 1st amendment referring to freedom of the press is no longer operative and Time should be shut down.

I don't know where you got the information that Stengel's is a LEFTIST agenda. I consider myself Left and Liberal, and I completely agree with you. It would be much better to leave off the name-calling and realize that we actually agree here, that there are many of both persuasions who believe in the the rights granted by the Constitution--our basic rights as Americans--and fear their undermining. We will be much stronger and have a much greater effect if we work together.