Yes, Democracies Die, but Republicanism Lives On

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

The leftist website Vox.com posted an article yesterday entitled, “How democracies die, explained.” Of course it has to do with the president, but they add that, “The problems in American democracy run far deeper than Trump.” Well bully for them. Dilly Dilly!

Now right off the bat, we should notice a glaring error. It may stem from calculation or ignorance. In case you missed it, America is not a democracy. However those of leftist persuasion often refer to the United States as one. We are of course a representative republic.

To the ignorant, those who have not been taught the difference, this is understandable. Being ignorant is simply lacking knowledge. No matter how well educated one is, he or she will always be ignorant of something. There are no exceptions. Okay one. God knows everything.

However, knowing the difference and deliberately misleading the ignorant is a different story. This, for want of better term, is malicious. read more

The Rise and Fall of the American Empire

by: the Common Constitutionalist

When watching (if you have the stomach for it) Obama’s State of the Union show tonight, with his laundry list of Nanny-State proposals and usurpation of our God-given rights, remember that nothing of this world lasts forever. That includes nations.

The Egyptians, Greeks, Romans; none stood the test of time.

They do, however, have one thing in common. They all lasted several hundred to several thousand years. We may not be so lucky.

In 1787 a crowd gathered outside the hall where the Constitutional convention was held in order to learn what had been produced behind closed doors. As the doors were opened and the delegates began to emerge, a woman identified only as Mrs. Powell of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, “Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?”

With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, “A Republic, madam, if you can keep it.”

The more I learn of the founders of our nation, the more convinced I am that they were and are still the greatest collection of minds to walk this earth. They were divinely inspired and prescient.

Franklin knew, as did the other founders, the republic, like children, must be nurtured and given constant attention, lest they stray down the wrong path. In the case of the republic, it is the path toward tyranny.

The founders charged the citizens of this country to actively pursue righteousness in our elected officials, and to remain alert to the activities at every level of government.

With each passing decade, we have become forgetful and complacent. The average American today knows little to nothing of our own founding or the original intent of our government, or what those people endured to allow us the opportunity to rule ourselves.

Yet over time we have willingly squandered that opportunity to instead choose to be ruled by those who should serve us.

Some would say that the citizenry is just too busy to be bothered by such things. As our society has “evolved” and “progressed”, it is said that things have just become too complicated and the founders could not have foreseen the problems of today. Woodrow Wilson said just that as he advocated for a “Living Constitution“. read more

Is Revolution Inevitable?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

This one’s going to feel like a real bummer, but I’ll bet I’m not the only one thinking this:

Has the grand experiment called the United States of America run its course – the idea that a country, a people can rule itself? That a true representative Republic could be formed and withstand the test of time?

 

Well, I’m fast becoming convinced that man’s natural state is not one of freedom and liberty. It is becoming evident that the natural state of most humans is servitude and sloth.

 

It seems more and more Americans at least appear to be satisfied with the meager existence offered up by their masters in government. It seems that rugged American spirit has been replaced with a want to be cared for.

 

It may not be most, but certainly enough Americans are satisfied with the direction our country is heading. There appear to be enough citizens that are okay with the imperial nature of our current government, as demonstrated by the tyrants which they elect, year after year.

 

But what of the rest of us? We can’t all move to Belize. What do we do? What do we do when “our party” gives up and passes a “clean” debt ceiling bill without even a whisper of a fight?

 

Any reasonable citizen should be very worried when a sitting Supreme Court justice, Antonin Scalia, is convinced the concentration camps are likely in our future. read more

Destination Tyranny

by: the Common Constitutionalist

I have stated for years and still contend, socialism is not a destination. It is merely a direction on a compass or a stepping stone on the path toward an eventual destination. More often than not, that final destination is some form of despotism, such as fascism or communism; certainly tyrannical.

Well, it seems my once conservative state of New Hampshire appears to be leapfrogging socialism and is making a beeline to the despotic.

cynthia-chaseA New Hampshire state representative, Cynthia Chase, feels free state conservatives are the states, “single biggest threat” and assured her constituents she will attempt to, “pass measures that will restrict the freedoms of granite state conservatives”.

Evidently conservatives are more of a threat than is terrorism, the crumbling economy, lack of jobs or even, dare I say it, Global Warming.

She recently posted a blog on the lefty website Blue Hampshire.

In her December 21 blog post she wrote:

“In the opinion of this Democrat, Free Staters are the single biggest threat the state is facing today. There is, legally, nothing we can do to prevent them from moving here to take over the state, which is their openly stated goal. In this country you can move anywhere you choose and they have that same right. What we can do is to make the environment here so unwelcoming that some will choose not to come, and some may actually leave. One way is to pass measures that will restrict the ‘freedoms’ that they think they will find here. Another is to shine the bright light of publicity on who they are and why they are coming.”

For those unfamiliar, “Free Staters” are conservatives that, as part of the “Free State Project”, move to New Hampshire, as well as other states, and settle into Live-free-or-diecommunities. There they run for local office in an attempt to further the conservative cause. They, the Free Staters, claim New Hampshire’s “Live Free or Die” motto should actually mean something. What a novel idea!

Ms. Chase, on the other hand, would prefer to use the power of the state to target certain individuals. That’s the American Soviet way.

She has evidently learned a few things from the union thugs and “Occupy Wall Streeters” that no doubt support her, when Chase stated she would like to, “shine the bright light of publicity on who they are and why they are coming”.

What could she mean by the bright light of publicity? Might she wish to encourage fellow leftists to visit, picket and otherwise harass peaceful freedom loving citizens in their homes and places of business? You can bank on it. Richard Trumka would be proud.

Seriously folks, is this not the definition of tyranny?

Just imagine if after winning his recall election, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker posted a blog stating he would target blacks and homosexuals. The governor’s blog post would reflect his scott walkerdesire to make blacks and homosexuals so uncomfortable that they would pack up and leave Wisconsin.

The post would end up on the front page of every newspaper and be the lead story of all news outlets; Internet, television and radio four weeks, as well it should. Have you seen the Chase story anywhere?

Would the governor have every right to write the post? Absolutely, and I would defend his right just as I defend Ms. Chase’s right to say what she actually did say. Freedom of speech is a much different thing than the desire to bring the force of the state against its citizens.

We have a serious and growing problem in America. Supposed Constitutional law professors and Nobel Prize winners wish to scrap the very thing that made America different and better than all others in history; our Constitution.

With the reelection of a president by a country filled with citizens completely devoid of any understanding of history, we should expect more Cynthia Chases, or worse.

If a state becomes too oppressive, one can always move to a freer state.

What happens when a country becomes tyrannical?

Attribution: Breitbart, Rush Limbaugh

Constitution 101 (5)

http://www.hillsdale.edu/constitution/week_05_overview.aspx

Lesson 5:“The Separation of Powers: Ensuring Good Government”

Study Guide

Overview
The separation of powers helps to ensure good government at the same time it guards against tyranny. Independent in function but coordinated in the pursuit of justice, the three branches of government—legislative, executive, and judicial—must each have enough power to resist the encroachment of the others, and yet not so much that the liberty of the people is lost.

A political regime has three dimensions: the ruling institutions, the rulers, and the way of life of the people. In America, the rulers—the people themselves—and their ruling institutions—staffed by the people’s representatives—aim at securing the Creator-endowed natural rights of all citizens. The Framers did this in two ways. “Vertically” considered, our ruling institutions are defined by federalism, or the division of power between the national, state, and local governments. “Horizontally” considered, the ruling institutions of the federal government itself are separated and co-equal.

In the American regime, the Constitution is the “supreme law of the land.” No one branch is superior to it; all three branches have a duty to abide by it. While each of the three branches plays a unique role in the passage, execution, and interpretation of laws, all of the branches must work together in the governing process.

The legislative branch is closest to the people. It is also the branch in which the danger of majority tyranny lurks. The passions of the people are reflected most in the House of Representatives, where the members are elected for terms of two years. The Senate, with its six year terms, was designed to be a more stable legislative presence than the House.

The defining characteristic of the executive is “energy.” The president can act swiftly and decisively to deal with foreign threats and to enforce the law, and can also provide a check on legislative tyranny through the veto.

Members of the judiciary, the third branch of government, must exercise judgment in particular cases to secure individual rights. Through “judicial review,” the judiciary is given the authority to strike down laws that are contrary to the Constitution. But judicial review is not judicial supremacy; even the Supreme Court must rely upon the other branches once it has rendered judgment.

The checks that each branch can exercise against the encroachment of the others ultimately protect the liberties of the people. The separation of powers promotes justice and good government by having each branch perform its proper function. This institutional design allows the sovereign people to observe and to know which branch is responsible for which actions in order to hold each to account. The sense of mutual responsibility built into the separation of powers is a reflection of the moral and civic responsibility all Americans share.