Constitution? Why Bother?

h/t: Mediaite

From Slate

Richard A. Posner is a judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, and a senior lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School:

I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries—well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments). Eighteenth-century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture, technology, etc., of the 21stcentury. Which means that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post–Civil War amendments (including the 14th), do not speak to today.

I was not aware that the Constitution had been recalled, and I’d hate to find myself on the wrong side of a debate with the distinguished judge, but we here in the hinterlands like our rights.  I think the Bill of Rights ‘speaks to today’ whatever the hell that’s supposed to mean.JEFFERSON.jpg

We’d like to understand that the restrictions put on government are still in place.
We’d really like for the restrictions the government puts on us, are proper.
Constitutions do that. At least they used to.

Time and again the federal government coerces states and the citizens into one action or another, holding our own taxes hostage. Time and again regulations are piled upon existing regulations to the point where an honest businessperson can’t help but break 15 rules before breakfast. Again and again we find basic rights of free expression, religious practice and free speech limited by the government and its representatives.

The 21st century is no different from the previous.  Full of arrogant elites, blustering politicians and pompous blowhards who want to take away freedom.

A similar take from John Hoge.

This entry was posted in Free Speech, freedom, Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Constitution? Why Bother?

  1. Jeanette Victoria says:

    Seems like this book is timely doesn’t it? Our Lost Constitution: The Willful Subversion of America’s Founding Document by Mike Lee

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Accipe remedium, Tremule! says:

    This bum needs to be impeached.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Grace says:

      Yeah. Let’s go with that “living” document concept that changes with technology and follows the trends and whims of society and culture. What could possibly go wrong?

      Impeachment would be too good for this rat bastard.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Accipe remedium, Tremule! says:

        He truly is a rat bastard. His potshots at the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia were redolent of the green-eyed monster.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Grace says:

        Indeed, Accipe.

        And, the rat bastard specifically calling out the 14th Amendment speaks volumes. What a tyrannical fascist. *spit*

        Liked by 2 people

  3. onwyrdsdream says:

    At the very least, any which are sworn to uphold it should have a fair grasp of what they’re swearing to.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Paul Krendler says:

    If the constitution doesn’t “speak to today,” then does that mean appointments to the FEderal bench are no longer for life?

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Absolute truths are dead, God is dead, the Constitution is dead. Now what?

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Paul Krendler says:

    America is on life support and the Left has their hand on the plug…

    Liked by 2 people

  7. “I do not know whether it is to yourself or Mr. Adams I am to give my thanks for the copy of the new constitution. I beg leave through you to place them where due. It will be yet three weeks before I shall receive them from America. There are very good articles in it: and very bad. I do not know which preponderate. What we have lately read in the history of Holland, in the chapter on the Stadtholder, would have sufficed to set me against a Chief magistrate eligible for a long duration, if I had ever been disposed towards one: and what we have always read of the elections of Polish kings should have forever excluded the idea of one continuable for life. Wonderful is the effect of impudent and persevering lying. The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusets? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion. The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. I hope in god this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted.”
    – Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Paris, 13 Nov. 1787

    It’s rather disconcerting how easily what he said then can be applied now with a just a few name changes. I guess it’s proof that human nature remains ever the same.

    Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s