Freedom under our Constitution is NOT protected by “good men.” In fact, its authors were highly aware that the cast of characters implementing the Constitution would include many selfish, power-hungry, egotists. So they divided power, distributing it intentionally to geographies, economic interests and loyalty factions that would be naturally in conflict with one another. This, in turn, limits the ability to centralize power. De-centralized power is what protects freedom - not trust in the innate goodness of select persons. Good people make the system work better, but the system was not designed dependent on them.
I agree that's how the system was designed to work, but how does it work now? In our previous discussion we agreed (I think) that our constitutional rights hung on the thread of five men and women on the Supreme Court. That's surely not what the founders intended.
This is once more the difference between "de jure" and "de facto" - "is" versus "ought". Ever since the New Deal, where FDR amassed tremendous power and distributed it through countless federal agencies, to the point where the federal bureaucracy today has over two million employees, many of whom have more de facto power than our elected officials, we have been ruled by a different system than the one our founders created.
My experience is that Constitutional checks and balances work very much like an unseen hand, stopping usurpations of individual freedom on a near daily basis as activist legislators (like AOC) are checked by policemen (like Dan Bongino) and judges (like Jeanine Pirro). That daily division of power doesn’t exist in countries lacking U.S.- style constitutions.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams
The dividing and separation of powers that the Founding Fathers put into place is merely a leg on the stool. If you took the US Constitution and attempted to implement it in Somalia, how do you think that would work?
The Constitution is only as good as the people who are willing to adhere and abide by it. John Adams understood this.
"the system only works when we have leaders in power who are willing to make it work. The Covid lockdowns proved that many of our leaders — elected or not — are not good people who respect the rights of the people, and so the Constitution itself is no fetter to their totalitarian impulses."
When electing(voting for) those that run for office, it is extremely important to vote in accordance with what politicians actually DO...not what they SAY. District 8 has censured Matt Bundy and Geoff Schroeder for what they DO....which was totally in contrary to their oath to the republican party as well as their "STATED" promises. PAY. ATTENTION TO POLITICAL VOTING RECORDS...thats who they are...and that's who they are representing. Too many politicians in Idaho are NOT "doing" what they are preaching. Vote them out. It's not hard to tell who they are.
Arguing superlatives is meaningless. If you continue reading Adams you quickly find out he is not saying 100% of all citizens under the constitution must be God-fearing righteous people. The principles of our constitution work only for a people who value those ends. For any group of people desiring serfdom and slavery, our constitution is a wrong fit.
💯👍🙏🇺🇸
Freedom under our Constitution is NOT protected by “good men.” In fact, its authors were highly aware that the cast of characters implementing the Constitution would include many selfish, power-hungry, egotists. So they divided power, distributing it intentionally to geographies, economic interests and loyalty factions that would be naturally in conflict with one another. This, in turn, limits the ability to centralize power. De-centralized power is what protects freedom - not trust in the innate goodness of select persons. Good people make the system work better, but the system was not designed dependent on them.
I agree that's how the system was designed to work, but how does it work now? In our previous discussion we agreed (I think) that our constitutional rights hung on the thread of five men and women on the Supreme Court. That's surely not what the founders intended.
This is once more the difference between "de jure" and "de facto" - "is" versus "ought". Ever since the New Deal, where FDR amassed tremendous power and distributed it through countless federal agencies, to the point where the federal bureaucracy today has over two million employees, many of whom have more de facto power than our elected officials, we have been ruled by a different system than the one our founders created.
My experience is that Constitutional checks and balances work very much like an unseen hand, stopping usurpations of individual freedom on a near daily basis as activist legislators (like AOC) are checked by policemen (like Dan Bongino) and judges (like Jeanine Pirro). That daily division of power doesn’t exist in countries lacking U.S.- style constitutions.
And Dan Bongino and Jeanine Pirro are PEOPLE within the system. Replace them with Eric Holder and Alejandro Mayorkas...
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” - John Adams
The dividing and separation of powers that the Founding Fathers put into place is merely a leg on the stool. If you took the US Constitution and attempted to implement it in Somalia, how do you think that would work?
The Constitution is only as good as the people who are willing to adhere and abide by it. John Adams understood this.
"the system only works when we have leaders in power who are willing to make it work. The Covid lockdowns proved that many of our leaders — elected or not — are not good people who respect the rights of the people, and so the Constitution itself is no fetter to their totalitarian impulses."
When electing(voting for) those that run for office, it is extremely important to vote in accordance with what politicians actually DO...not what they SAY. District 8 has censured Matt Bundy and Geoff Schroeder for what they DO....which was totally in contrary to their oath to the republican party as well as their "STATED" promises. PAY. ATTENTION TO POLITICAL VOTING RECORDS...thats who they are...and that's who they are representing. Too many politicians in Idaho are NOT "doing" what they are preaching. Vote them out. It's not hard to tell who they are.
Arguing superlatives is meaningless. If you continue reading Adams you quickly find out he is not saying 100% of all citizens under the constitution must be God-fearing righteous people. The principles of our constitution work only for a people who value those ends. For any group of people desiring serfdom and slavery, our constitution is a wrong fit.