WND Exclusive – IS DESPOTISM IN OUR FUTURE?

from Brent Smith for World Net Daily:

Other than Uncle Joe Biden, it seems that every other presidential candidate has crossed over from being liberal to full-blown socialist. And many on the right are surprised at this. Many seem surprised at how fast we are descending from a free and liberty-loving society to one that gives every appearance of emulating Venezuela.

But that could never happen here – right? Of course not – although not too long ago Venezuela was one of the most prosperous nations on Earth. But hey, as the saying goes: they just haven’t done socialism right. Seems no one has.

For years, we conservatives complained about Obama, saying that he was a lawless president, he was despotic, that we’ve never seen anyone like him. How did he ever get elected? read more

WND Exclusive – WHAT ABOUT AMENDING THE 2ND AMENDMENT?

from Brent Smith for World Net Daily:

The Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution to prevent government infringement on our natural rights as Americans. It was designed to prevent government the ability to bestow and therefore rescind the rights of the individual.

To that, there was an interesting and thought-provoking article in the Washington Post recently. I’m not sure I’ve ever uttered those words in the same sentence: thought-provoking and Washington Post.

As I rarely peruse the pages of the Post, I must thank Jazz Shaw at HotAir.com for bringing it to our attention. read more

Podcast – The Electoral College – They Brought it Up – Not Us

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Okay – here we go again with the Electoral College. Why do we have to keep talking about the antiquated Electoral College?

But we on the right didn’t bring it up. The democrats continue to. I could be discussing other stuff, and really, who cares about the Electoral College. It’s dry and boring and does it really matter anyway?

Well, we better care and care a lot, because if the left wins the propaganda war and eventually somehow amends the Constitution or something, this country is finished. That’s not hyperbole – it’s cold hard fact.

If you want the Founders explanation of why it’s needed, read Federalist Paper, number 68, written by Alexander Hamilton.

I’m just doing it in modern day bad English.

So as long as the left keeps trying to ram pure democracy, mob rule, down our throats, we have to continue to at least try to educate those who might listen to the logic and beauty of our election system. read more

Podcast – A Good Crisis is Tailor Made for a Gun Grab

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

The New Zealand Mosque shootings was a crisis, tailor made for a State crack down on freedom. But despite the gun grab in New Zealand, liberal politicians have insisted forever, that they don’t want to take away our guns here in the U.S.

But it’s just like socialism. Years ago, if someone on the right accused someone on the left of being a socialist, it would have sparked outrage. How dare we try to label them as socialist. They would say that we’re just fearmongering.

Now, not many years later, socialism has all but been entirely embraced by the left. I mean, they’ve always embraced it in some form. It’s just now they’re admitting to it, and no longer shy away from the “S” word. Socialism of course.

And like socialism, American gun-grabbers have begun to take the mask of reason off. However, the one thing standing in their way is the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which is unique and superior to all others, and not subject to the crisis du jour.

Thank Heavens for that. read more

Sometimes Polls Have Little Relevance

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

“A Gallup Poll conducted last week [two weeks ago] showed Trump with negative ratings of 58 percent and positive ratings of 40 percent. These figures reflected similar findings in the Economist You Gov poll conducted at the same time, which had Trump down 54-44 percent. In contrast, YouGov had Pelosi down 52-48 percent and Schumer down 49-32 percent. Trump has higher disapproval, but Pelosi and Schumer have lower approval ratings — in part, I think because they are less well-known,” veteran polling analyst Jay O’Callaghan told Newsmax.

But so what? What’s the difference whose poll numbers are higher or lower?

Some might ask, “Doesn’t that equate to popularity which directly equates to reelection chances?”

The short answer is, as of right now, it makes no difference. read more

WND Exclusive – Is the American Experiment About to Implode?

from Brent Smith for World Net Daily:

Although it is often overused by us on the right – I’m thankful to be an American. It sounds cheesy and jingoistic. It may be, but

that doesn’t make it any less true, particularly when you know American history and what our forefathers had to go through to achieve it. And no, this will not be a history lesson. Not much of one anyway.

I wish I could travel back in time, not to change anything, but just to thank the founders for what they did, to thank them for their foresight. I’d like to assure them that they did the right thing, that they didn’t go through all that for nothing, that hundreds of years later we are still talking about it, still quoting them and trying to live their ideal. read more

The Second Amendment is an Individual Right – the Founders Said So

The primary purpose of the 10 Amendments that form the Bill of Rights was to protect the natural rights of the individual from encroaching federal government function. We must remind ourselves and others of this. The only way someone would not know this is if they have not read them. So when a leftist begins to spout off about the Second Amendment, that it applies only to hunting or militias, we must remind them of this. If necessary, review each of the 10 and it will become clear that the founders did not intend for nine of the 10 to pertain primarily to the individual and yet single out just the Second as not having any individual component. It defies logic. But then so does liberalism.

So if we agree that the 10 Amendments pertain to individual rights,  we must then agree that the right to “keep and bear arms” also pertains to the individual. I might also suggest that you explain what “keep and bear arms” means. Simply put, it means to own and carry arms in defense of oneself and others.

Justin Haskins of the Blaze has cataloged several of the views of our founding fathers in the following article.

from the Blaze:

In their own words: What the Founding fathers really believed about guns

When the Founding Fathers approved the “right to bear arms” and the 13 newly formed states agreed to ratify the Second Amendment, the reason couldn’t be clearer: An armed citizenry is a free citizenry.

Yet despite the clear historical evidence showing the true intention behind the Second Amendment, liberals continue to mislead the public by asserting the founders believed the Second Amendment only protects guns necessary for everyday life in the 18th century, such as hunting rifles, or that the founders believed these constitutional protections apply only to militias, not to individuals.

These notions are nothing more than left-wing delusions, carefully crafted by people who in their pursuit of power and “public safety” have become desperate to take away law-abiding citizens’ centuries-old rights to own and operate guns.

As Richard Brookhiser, a historian and author of “What Would the Founders Do?,” concluded in his book’s section on the Second Amendment, “The founders lived among guns; they would never make them illegal; they would subject them to necessary laws, following [William] Blackstone. And they broke their own laws when honor demanded it.” 

Continue reading

A Living Constitution Provides No Stability

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

I’ve written a lot regarding the Constitution over the years – although not usually two days in row. Most times the topic boils down to a choice between the stability of originalism or the chaos of the co-called “living document.” This has been a great debate since the dawn of the progressive era.

In 2006 Elliott Mincberg, the vice president of the ultra lefty group “People for the American Way” said: “It was the framers intent that the Constitution would adapt to changing circumstances.” In other words, a living Constitution.

Most would be surprised that, in my opinion, the founders would agree with Mr. Mincberg – although I guarantee they would not agree with his method of change.

That same year Todd Gaziono of the Heritage Foundation said: “Original intent is the only legitimate means of interpretation under our written Constitution and all other philosophies are illegitimate.” Mr. Gaziono is also correct.

Okay, both can’t be correct. Obviously the “living Constitution” crowd is wrong because, as we all know, the left has no desire to amend the Constitution. They instead see fit to usurp the Constitution by means of laws, court precedents and presidential decrees.  read more

WND Exclusive – Are you, too, a ‘Declarationist’?

1864 Two Cent Coin

Memorial Day has come and gone. I hope you all sought out the family of one of our fallen heroes or at least said a prayer on their behalf.

Now we’re into summer, though not technically, and America’s next great celebration is on the horizon – that of our nation’s independence.

We in America, and certainly us political wonks, write and speak constantly of the United States Constitution. We may do so often that it can sometimes seem tiresome to listen to – even for other fans of the Constitution. Not that I hear this from my friends and family or anything. read more

Thank Heavens for the Bill of Rights

by: the Common Constitutionalist

The Republicans in the Senate do occasionally find their backbones and were able to display them as they rejected four pieces of anti-gun legislation. Thank you Republicans and thank you founders for giving us the Bill of Rights.

Given the current state of the federal leviathan, imagine the condition of our individual and states’ rights without the specific declaration of those protections against federal intrusion. Turns out the anti-federalists were right to insist on a Bill of Rights!

We would have no right to own or carry a weapon of any kind without the language expressed in the Second Amendment. We on the right would have nothing specific to argue against the gun-grabbers of the left. For decades we have debated the language and meaning of the Second Amendment, but without it, our argument would be relegated to the abstract, for nowhere else does the Constitution specifically address this right. Given the nature of today’s courts – that would not be nearly enough. Thanks to George Mason and the anti-federalists, we at least have the Amendment specifying this natural right.

Our freedom of speech, assembly, religion, etc. would all be substantially abridged, if not for the First Amendment. We would have virtually no states’ rights left without the Tenth – and so on. read more