The power of III

Summum ius summa iniuria--More law, less justice

06 July 2011

Sheriff Mack on "Lamestream" Time magazine's view of the Constitution

Verbatim post, via

Sheriff Richard Mack
In the July 4, 2011, issue of TIME magazine, Managing Editor Richard Stengel, calls the Constitution “elastic” and even goes so far as to claim that was exactly what the Founders intended to do; make the Constitution flexible and mutable.  To follow this “logic” and revisionist philosophy, TIME would have us all believe that the Framers of our Constitution were merely forming a new government based on generalities and ideas of relativity, certain only of one thing, that future generations would hammer out something that might preserve some semblance of the “democracy” the Founding Fathers were leaving us. 

It was actually a Republic. 

The word ‘Democracy’ is never mentioned in the Constitution, but how would we expect TIME’s Managing Editor to know that? TIME stays deeply within its own mainstream culture to convince us all that everything going on in government today is exactly as it was intended. The Constitution has no absolutes, it was not written as a limitation, it contains no real law based on principles, it’s merely a record of suggestions by some well-meaning colonists who could have never known what we really need today.
In fact, Stengel makes two very startling, if not downright bewildering claims. First, and I quote, “Politicians ask all the time, What would the Framers say?” 

Wow! Really? Today’s politicians ask all the time, “What would the Framers say?” Please show me one time! I watch the news every day. I have never heard Barak Obama say such a thing. When was the last time Nancy Pelosi asked, “What would the Framers say?” How about John McCain, Harry Reid, Mitt Romney, John Kerry, Mayor Bloomberg, Chris Christie, any of these politicians who are in the news daily; when did any of them ask about the Framers? Second, and even more astonishing, the Managing Editor of a major international publication, informs us all that we can never know what the Framers said; they’re gone, we can no longer use their wisdom to prove anyone wrong!
So, according to TIME and Stengel, we cannot look at the intent of the Founding Fathers nor learn from their wisdom because “…they’re not around to prove anyone wrong.” 

I guess we should all ignore the Federalist Papers, and all the other journals and writings of the Framers. We should ignore the warnings of Patrick Henry in his fiery “Give me Liberty or Give me Death” speech, or Thomas Paine’s Common Sense booklet or the biography of John Adams which quotes many of his beliefs in letters he wrote to his wife Abigail. Perhaps when we all walk through the Jefferson Memorial, we should ignore the quotes on the walls about freedom and Jefferson’s passion for American idealism. We can’t know what the Framers intended when they wrote the Bill of Rights and what on earth they could have meant when they proclaimed, “Congress shall make no law…”
How convenient for our “leaders” that they interpret such ambiguity for all of us! What would we do without them? Could the Founders have actually thought that these rules should be obeyed instead of interpreted? Was the Bill of Rights written to protect inviolable principles? Nah! The Bill of Rights did nothing to limit Government. Why?  Because TIME said the Framers knew nothing about airplanes, computers, or Lady Gaga! You got me there Mr. Stengel; who could argue with such profound brilliance?
Therefore, when the Founders fought for freedom and subsequent to the Revolution, wrote the Constitution, and required within the Constitution (Art VI last paragraph) that each soldier, each Judge, all legislators, all peace officers, and even specified the President himself, to swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution, they meant only as far as they agreed with its elasticity. When they said the Constitution would be the chains by which all leaders would be bound, they meant only sort of  bound, with elastic chains, perhaps even less confining than rubber bands, but certainly not chains!
Yes, Mr. Stengel, you and TIME are demonstrating once again that you have earned the title of “Lamestream Media.”  You attempt to rationalize away our sacred Constitution and thereby assist with the mainstream destruction of what the FRAMERS, yes, the FRAMERS, established in the first place.
The one valid point TIME magazine made in this 4th of July issue, was showing the Constitution in shreds. And nothing is more evident of this shredding than TIME’s/Stengel’s idiotic explanation as to why politicians no longer follow the Constitution. No, I don’t know what the Framers would have said about Lady Gaga nor do I care one iota. But I do know what they would have said about forced socialistic health care, a $15 trillion national debt, and a bunch of Weiners in DC. 

And about your article, I’ll let Thomas Jefferson tell you what he thought of your article and your magazine, and I quote, “The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.” It’s amazing how much the Framers knew!
Richard Mack
Fredericksburg, TX

No comments:

Post a Comment