Comments on: Anti-Constitution Libertarians

By: ScrewUnions

ScrewUnions — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:38:09 +0000

Private property and customary law.

By: Harold Thomas

Harold Thomas — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 02:51:52 +0000

chromodynamicgirl: What would you prefer?

By: chromodynamicgirl

chromodynamicgirl — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 02:35:14 +0000

Limited government is a fantasy, republicanism is worse than feudalism and the Constitution is a bunch of liberal nonsense.

By: Freedom

Freedom — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 12:05:17 +0000

Umm… what? If only the US gov would listen and obey your wonderful sentiments of honesty, truth and justice…we would all be able to prance around with flowers in our hair….

However, in our current reality we need to be doing everything we can to stop tyranny! Even unto the point of death if need be! Oh and by the way liberal humanism is an abomination, and a true enemy of liberty.

By: Liberal_Revolution

Liberal_Revolution — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:31:42 +0000

As a liberal myself, I don’t believe the constitution is what gave the Federal Government their power,
I believe the FED conspired to keep teachings of the constitution limited in our schools. And in doing so, they keep our generations today naive as to their Constitutional Rights [which are being trampled either way]
We the people, including the ones not learning from websites like this, hold our future in OUR hands. If we don’t educate eachother and invoke our Rights, noone else will. period.

By: Jake Williams

Jake Williams — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 23:12:26 +0000

I think the crux of the matter is whether self-government of one population of 350million people is possible. As Aristotle thought, there is a limit to the size of nations. In 1780, the population of the U.S. was 2.78 million people (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_… New York City today has a population of 19 million (6.8 times that of all of the U.S. at the time of ratification).

At 2.78 million people, there was a fierce debate over whether one federal government would be too much (see federalist/anti-federalist papers). I think many of the problems we see today such as voter apathy, overwhelming centralized power, theft through taxation, are all tied to this problem of one government over so many people.

The war of northern aggression certainly destroyed the Constitution that we did have, but I maintain that it was only a matter of time before it would be destroyed by the immense size of the federal government.

This is why simply "getting back to the Constitution" won't work. That's akin to saying if we just wear the clothes we had when we were 5, everything will fit better.

The biggest flaw I see with the constitution is that there wasn't a provision for terminating it if the population grew beyond a certain number.

Live Free or Die!

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 08:02:00 +0000

If all the states exercise their sovereignty through nullification and interposition. The federal government would be reduced to the original confines of the constitution. We would be free again…then we could work on improving the constitutional with additional safe guards. Read the Declaration of Independence for more insight on this.

By: singletaxonland

singletaxonland — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 06:16:17 +0000

There would be different outcomes if we followed the constitution. IE."The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand,…"

Allowing one Representative to represent, 600,000 and going up, that many people just begs for corruption. Large voting districts require immense amounts of money to run for office. The Senate changing to be elected by voters was a misguided amendment resulting in money over ideas. This makes it difficult to say the Constitution is a failure.

The less people to buy off the easier it is to get what you want. Thus, a small House of Rep. and elected Senators. Getting rid of the Articles of Confederation limited the buying of influence from 13 States down to one Federal government. Same principle.

I think it was a peaceful Coup d' etat . The A of Confederation would have worked out the interstate commerce
problem eventually. The big loss is the Constitution opened up the door, especially in the 20th Century, to taxation on the industry of the people. The A of confederation based taxation on land values which is the only moral means to raise revenue since no individual created land or the value of it. The land speculators disagreed, thus the Constitution.

By: Noel Jones

Noel Jones — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:04:57 +0000

I'll way in here although I maybe a little late to the party, (just found this article today). It's not the the Constitution in and off it self that is flawed, it is the application of the Constitution that is flawed. We believe that, and let's look at the first admendment, the Constitution grants you as a citizen of the US freedom of speech. I would point out that it does not. The Constitutuion states that the Federal Government "shall make no law" regulating speech. So we tend to apply the Constitution backwards, not as intended. As Jefferson said there are only "inaliable (sp?) rights that were endowed to us by our creator such as life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness. When we as a people allow an entity created by men to grant us rights we also allow them to take them away. So apply the Constitution to the entity it was created to be applied to – the Federal Government.

Not responsible for spelling errors. I was educated in the public school system…… lol

By: Mike Church

Mike Church — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 17:31:06 +0000

Not only did Judge Yates oppose the ratification, on 15 July, he and Robert Lansing stormed out of the convention in protest leaving the New York delegation to Hamilton. New York's governor George Clinton was a vigorous opponent of ratification too.

Madison' veto of Henry Clay's "Bonus Bill" is a statement of his belief in federalism and the enumeration of powers found in Art 1, Section 8. He was both hero and villain in the founding era.

if you want to read the best criticism of the Constitution prior to ratification, read the debates in the Virginia Ratifying Convention and concentrate of Patrick Henry's warnings on the danger the document posed to liberty (he was correct on every point including accurately predicting Lincoln's war). If you want the cliffs note version of this watch my movie "The Spirit of '76-Writing and Ratifying the US Constitution".

Mike Church
Host -The Mike Church Show on Sirius-XM

[youtube vfQJXBBxZ0Y http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfQJXBBxZ0Y youtube]