Torching The Constitution

“…the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.”

–Barack Obama

“When a lovely flame dies; Smoke gets in your eyes”

–Jerome Kern/Otto Harback

…and sometimes into other parts of your anatomy.  Leftists, who routinely use rhetorical vapors to obscure their positions rather than to mark them, are currently popping the canisters to cover an all-out assault on the Constitution of the United States and the freedoms which it guarantees to every American. Our current leftist president, of course, began attacking the Constitution as soon he’d finished swearing his oath to defend it. But he’s no different than the rest of his fellow radicals.  Take, for example, the following by Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein (emphases mine):

[...] it is important to resist, on democratic grounds, the idea that the document should be interpreted to reflect the view of the extreme right-wing of the Republican Party. This idea, sometimes masquerading under the name of originalism or strict construction, represents a form of judicial hubris; it is bad history and bad law. It should be exposed and rejected as such.

For 2020, what should be asserted instead is a form of judicial minimalism, one that also gives the democratic process wide room to maneuver. The appropriate path is not charted by Roe v. Wade; it is charted instead by West Coast Hotel, upholding minimum wage legislation, and Katzenbach v. Morgan, allowing Congress to ban literacy tests. Moderates and liberals should not want the Supreme Court to march on the road marked out by the Warren Court. They should celebrate instead rulings that defer to Congress and that invalidate legislation rarely and only through narrow, unambitious rulings, akin to the Court’s recent decision in the Hamdi case.

Minimalists insist on a democratic conception of the free speech principle and also on procedural safeguards for those deprived of their liberty. But they reject any Citizen’s Agenda if it is understood as part of constitutional law proper.

[...] the United States does not only have a Constitution; it also has a set of constitutive commitments, beyond mere policies but without a formal constitutional status. Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Second Bill of Rights was an effort to establish several such commitments, including, above all, decent opportunity and minimal security.

Sunstein’s fatuous remarks are comprised purely of the substance farmers use to fertilize their fields, and readily identifiable as such by the number of progressive flies perched metaphorically upon them. His odiferous proposal to re-interpret the Constitution by so-called “democratic conceptions” is left-wing nonsense that was emphatically rejected by people wiser than he at the very founding of the country.  Our United States is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy. And Sunstein’s Orwellian linguistic distortions portraying activist assassins of that founding document as “minimalists” are as absurd and outrageous as the self-identification of such murderous regimes as Cuba, North Korea, Communist China, and the former Soviet Union as ‘democratic’ and ‘republican’.  Don’t p*ss down my back & tell me it’s raining up, pal.

The main players in this subversive scheme to torch our Constitution are–in addition to Barack Obama and his Czar Sunstein–George Soros and his Open Society Institute, John Podesta and the Center for American Progress, and the American Constitution Society, which once included Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder on its board of directors.  The ACS braintrust includes a number of ‘issues’ groups

comprised of legal practitioners and scholars working together to articulate and publicize compelling progressive ideas.

Well, their ideas are not compelling to me–nor, I trust, to anyone else who considers the only appropriate and legal means to modify the Constitution is not ‘democratic conception’ but amendment, approved first by both houses of Congress, then by 3/4 of–in the words of our imprecise president–America’s “57″ states.

Related stories:

Progressives planning intense assault on Constitution – National Conservative | Examiner.com.

“The Constitution in 2020″ the agenda and tasks for changing the nature and interpretation of the Constitution into a fully “progressive” Marxist Manifesto by the year 2020 (a12iggymom’s Blog)

American Constitution faces ‘progressive’ threat (One Nation Under God…Forever)

Regulatory Czar Cass Sunstein And The Second Amendment (Always On Watch)

‘Constitution 2020′–a blueprint for tyranny? (Anthony Martin, National Conservative Examiner)

Democracy, Revolution, and The Imposition of Tyranny (Rogue Operator)

Advertisement