0 14 mins 4 weeks

This is the insane mentality that we are up against.

There is a piece in the LA Times by Nicholas Goldberg. Goldberg is a “Journalist” that has written for all the topline Left Wing rags, and has a BA from Harvard in “Government”. Well, Mr. Goldberg is unhappy with the recent Roe v Wade decision by SCOTUS. Except in his view it’s not just the Supreme Court that is the problem. His view is that These days the Constitution is showing its age.

He just published his enlightened reasons why in an article titled.

Hate the Supreme Court? Our problems actually start with the Constitution


He provides an excellent example of the elitist leftist lunacy that permeates the American Press. In his very first paragraph he attacks the very foundation that the United States was built on.

So you’re unhappy with the Supreme Court justices who turned back the clock on environmental protection, abortion, school prayer and guns? You’re angry because they’re ideologues with a reactionary agenda, flexing their muscles to eliminate rights, weaken government and endanger the planet?

As a Degree holder in Government from Harvard, you would think Mr. Goldberg would have an understanding of the roles of the different Branches of Government, what they do, and how they are supposed to do them. His Dismay over the Court pointing out that ONLY Congress can make Law as it did in the case of EPA is baffling, considering those are the rules. I guess we will give him a pass on remembering what he might have learned, it was after all 42 years ago that he earned his Degree.

The other issues he has show that whatever he did learn to get his BA, skipped over quite bit of the basics, if the Constitution was even taught in his courses on Government. What he writes makes one unsure that it was.

The Abortion Laws that were removed from the throats of the States were a Violation of the 10th Amendment. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The SCOTUS decision didn’t end Abortion in any way. It put that decision back into the proper Jurisdiction, the States. No where is the Federal Government given the Authority to Regulate or Control peoples private reproductive choices. If Mr. Goldberg claims it does he didn’t mention where.

Yet he still does have enough knowledge that he knows what the Constitution is, and does. He just thinks it’s out dated, and a problem.

The problem, or at least a substantial portion of it, lies with the U.S. Constitution itself.

Yes, the hallowed Constitution, the document hammered out in 1787 by 55 bewigged men in Philadelphia. Our revered charter that lays out the foundational rules and principles at the heart of the American experiment: freedom of speech and religion, the separation of powers, federalism, bicameralism and all the other checks, balances, rights, promises and innovations that make this nation what it is.

These days the Constitution is showing its age.

Yes, problems, problems, problems, especially when it comes to Prayer and Guns. There are those two Pesky Amendments. The first two. The first one he must like part of, it does after all acknowledges his Right to make a living as a member of a Free Press. I guess selective parts must still be relevant to him.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This part of it he has a problem with: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; I mean it does say the free exercise thereof, to most Americans and the Supreme Court kneeling and praying is an exercise of a persons Religion. Something that no laws or rules can be written to interfere with. I mean, my god, just think of the damage that is caused by witnessing someone praying, especially to the children. I do wonder what Mr. Goldberg’s feelings are in regard to Drag Queen Reading Time. If the sight of praying can effect people does he believe a man dressed as a woman reading faery tales might have an effect on a child also ?

The worst thing however is that damn 2nd Amendment.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I’m sure I can hear him now pointing at A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, it’s talking about the Army, the National Guard etc. The typical claptrap of ignorance that is so commonly spewed forth. Mr. Goldberg however is an Harvard educated man on Government, surely he knows that a Militia is neither the Army or the Guard. That it is in fact made up of ordinary citizens bringing their own firearms to the aid of the State or Federal Government. Just like with the 1st Amendment Mr. Goldberg ignores the parts that he does not like, that whole nonsense that says, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. That’s irrelevant, just like the practice of Religion.

If only his ignorance ended there. He goes on with his opining against our Foundation, and how it was written. He also snubs his nose at who wrote it, but you can go read his full whine with the link above. This piece of his disdain for the Constitution however is typical of his ilk and stressed even with a “referring Link”.

But today it is too inflexible, insufficiently democratic, and even in some ways dysfunctional. Many look to it now less as a model to be emulated than as a example of what to avoid.

You would think that someone who studied Government at Harvard would at the very least know and understand that the United States is not a Democracy. It is a constitutional federal republic. This is how it is explained by the State Department of the United States in our Embassies around the World where we would like to spread our form of Government:

While often categorized as a democracy, the United States is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic. What does this mean? “Constitutional” refers to the fact that government in the United States is based on a Constitution which is the supreme law of the United States. The Constitution not only provides the framework for how the federal and state governments are structured, but also places significant limits on their powers. “Federal” means that there is both a national government and governments of the 50 states. A “republic” is a form of government in which the people hold power, but elect representatives to exercise that power.

Once again I repeat this “Journalist” has a degree in “Government” from “Harvard.” Surely this was covered somewhere in one of his basic classes. I mean THAT is the description actually given by The Government.

That is not even the depth of his idiocy, it runs much deeper.

The Constitution created the undemocratic U.S. Senate that allots the same representation — two senators — to a state like Wyoming, which has fewer than 600,000 people, as it does to California, with nearly 40 million people.

It established the voting system that allows presidents to be elected who did not win the popular vote.

Maybe he missed the day in Class where they went over the Senate, and the 17th amendment. The Constitution was changed in regard to the Senate. The original purpose of the Senate was to protect the States, and to add a layer of stability to the Congress. The Senators were given the longest Term in Office of any elected official, and they were appointed by each States Legislature to protect the rights of the States. The 17th Amendment took that right away from the State Legislatures and gave it directly to The People via vote.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

Passed by Congress May 13, 1912. Ratified April 8, 1913. The 17th Amendment changed a portion of Article I, Section 3

The change however retained the Constitution’s original intent for the Senate. A House of Sr. Statesmen to balance the quickly changing (once every two years) and fluctuating numbers of The House of Representatives. Mr. Goldberg wants the Senate to be populated in the same manner as the House, totally defeating it’s very purpose to exist.

Of course in Mr. Goldberg’s view the Electoral College is nonsense. How dare the main population centers not control who gets to be President.

The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The Founding Fathers established it in the Constitution, in part, as a compromise between the election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. Your State has the same number of electors as it does Members in its Congressional delegation: one for each Member in the House of Representatives plus two Senators. The general election is held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. When you vote for a Presidential candidate you are actually voting for your candidate’s preferred electors.

Now that is a complex piece, well beyond the common man, I guess it is also beyond the grasp of a Harvard Grad.

The rest of Mr. Goldberg’s article he whines about the inadequacies of our Constitution. How many other nations have “Improved” upon it.

The most revealing part of his continual whine is here in these two separate paragraphs.

Unfortunately, amending the U.S. Constitution is extraordinarily difficult; it requires a vote of two-thirds of both houses of Congress and, after that, ratification by three-quarters of the states. A double supermajority.

Furthermore, opening up the Constitution to dramatic revision could also lead to undesirable changes. A constitutional convention, currently supported by many on the Republican right, would come with grave risks.

There is the Insanity and Stupidity that we the American People have to put up with. The fact that the Press is infested with a majority of Elitists who despise the FACT that the Constitution defines The People as where the Power and Direction of the Government and the Country shall come from.

The Constitution restrains Government, especially the Federal Government. It restricts Government to a very small number of areas. Mr. Goldberg and his ilk would prefer the opposite were true.

He is right on one thing. The Government does need to be revised, except revised to bring it back more towards it’s original intent. Restraining the Power of Government.

We do need that which he fears, an Article 5 Convention to Amend the Constitution. With the sole purpose of installing Cumulative Term Limits on Elected office. No one should be allowed to maintain a cumulative amount of years in office that exceeds 12yrs in combination of all elected Offices held in a lifetime.

The only way to limit the corruption that our Government suffers, is to limit the amount of time any one individual has access to Governmental Power. I somehow think such a restraint would appall Mr. Goldberg.

Please click the Link above, and read Mr. Goldberg’s article. I may laugh at his Harvard education, but I would not want to be accused of altering anything I’ve posted, or it’s sentiment. His article shines it’s own light on his idiocy just fine on it’s own.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 3 Average: 4.3]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.