The Social Network For Libertarians
SO what do I say to someone like this:
In a Libertarian group on Myspace, some anarchists were dogging the Constitution. I, however, rose up to defend it. Here is a post that someone posted:
"The politicians work within the government. The goal of most politicians is seek to keep their jobs. Incumbent politicians win something like 96% of the time. The idea that the politicians have failed is laughable at best. It isn’t their job to limit the government’s power. That is the purpose of the Constitution according to Donn and you apparently agree. The Constitution has not impeded the government’s growth a bit. "
I replied by saying:
"Because no one has listened to it. The Constitution says that the pres. cannot send troops into a country without congressional approval. Well, when Bush did that, no one in congress (except ron paul) said or did anything. so yea, politicians have failed. The fourth amendment says that congress cannot invade our privacy, yet congress (again, except ron paul) voted to put the patriot act in. get the picture? and yes, it is also the politicians’ job to limit government, using the Constitution. No one has used it in the last couple of decades. It places too many restrictions on liberal and neo-conservative views. And the idea that politicians have failed is "laughable"?? did you watch when they gave billions of dollars to AIG (except, yet, again, RON PAUL) and had no regard to the taxpayers? "
The other person replied again:
"Congress did approve Bush’s military adventures and Ron Paul voted in favor of the Afghan invasion. Ron Paul was not the only member of Congress to vote against the Iraq War nor the only member of Congress to vote against the Patriot Act. Yeah, I watched as Congress gave money to AIG, Citigroup, Bear Sterns, et al., but how is that a failure on their part? Like I said, the politician’s job is to keep his job. Their success at doing so makes the politicians successful, not failures. As long as a majority of their ignorant constituents keep pulling the lever for them, they’re doing their job.
I think you need a history lesson if you think it’s been the last couple decades that the Washingtonian Empire has been ignoring the Constitution. It’s more like the last couple centuries. You can’t trust any politician, not even the good Dr. Paul, who earmarks unconstitutional funds for his district generously. He votes against the final bills, knowing they’ll pass, but he makes sure to get his pork pies in beforehand. Why does he do this? Because his job is to stay in office and pork keeps politicians in office, just like everyone else in Washington.
Think about this for just a second. You’re arguing that the politicians - whose power is theoretically limited by the Constitution - are responsible for enforcing those restrictions on their own power. This is like telling a heroin addict that he is responsible for limiting his heroin consumption. "
Clearly, I see that this person does not understand the Constitution, however, that is just my view. What would a good -pro-Constitution response be?
"The politicians work within the government. The goal of most politicians is seek to keep their jobs. Incumbent politicians win something like 96% of the time. The idea that the politicians have failed is laughable at best. It isn’t their job to limit the government’s power. That is the purpose of the Constitution according to Donn and you apparently agree. The Constitution has not impeded the government’s growth a bit. "
I replied by saying:
"Because no one has listened to it. The Constitution says that the pres. cannot send troops into a country without congressional approval. Well, when Bush did that, no one in congress (except ron paul) said or did anything. so yea, politicians have failed. The fourth amendment says that congress cannot invade our privacy, yet congress (again, except ron paul) voted to put the patriot act in. get the picture? and yes, it is also the politicians’ job to limit government, using the Constitution. No one has used it in the last couple of decades. It places too many restrictions on liberal and neo-conservative views. And the idea that politicians have failed is "laughable"?? did you watch when they gave billions of dollars to AIG (except, yet, again, RON PAUL) and had no regard to the taxpayers? "
The other person replied again:
"Congress did approve Bush’s military adventures and Ron Paul voted in favor of the Afghan invasion. Ron Paul was not the only member of Congress to vote against the Iraq War nor the only member of Congress to vote against the Patriot Act. Yeah, I watched as Congress gave money to AIG, Citigroup, Bear Sterns, et al., but how is that a failure on their part? Like I said, the politician’s job is to keep his job. Their success at doing so makes the politicians successful, not failures. As long as a majority of their ignorant constituents keep pulling the lever for them, they’re doing their job.
I think you need a history lesson if you think it’s been the last couple decades that the Washingtonian Empire has been ignoring the Constitution. It’s more like the last couple centuries. You can’t trust any politician, not even the good Dr. Paul, who earmarks unconstitutional funds for his district generously. He votes against the final bills, knowing they’ll pass, but he makes sure to get his pork pies in beforehand. Why does he do this? Because his job is to stay in office and pork keeps politicians in office, just like everyone else in Washington.
Think about this for just a second. You’re arguing that the politicians - whose power is theoretically limited by the Constitution - are responsible for enforcing those restrictions on their own power. This is like telling a heroin addict that he is responsible for limiting his heroin consumption. "
Clearly, I see that this person does not understand the Constitution, however, that is just my view. What would a good -pro-Constitution response be?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Randy Speeg on -
Simple Answer: (directed to whoever posted that argument) The Constitution does not give the Congress the power to regulate Congress, it gives We The People the power to regulate Congress. If YOU don't like what YOUR Congressional Rep. is doing, it's YOUR duty to speak up, it's YOUR duty to write a nasty letter to that Rep., it's YOUR duty to tell others how you feel and encourage THEM to write letters as well, if the Rep. ignores you it's YOUR duty to step it up and organize petitions and protests to get YOUR message out, it's YOUR duty to encourage the voters to FIRE the Rep. when he/she acts like a clown. The purpose of the Constitution is to safe guard YOUR right to get up off YOUR LAZY ASS and do something about it. YOU have no one to blame but YOURSELF for the shortcomings of the Congressional Rep. YOUR district elected. If YOUR district elected a clown, then it's YOUR problem and YOU need to work YOUR ass off to get other people in YOUR district to vote for a GOOD Rep. If a Rep. from another district is doing something that YOU don't like, again it's YOUR duty to get information to the voters of that district. If the entire Congress screws up, again it's YOUR duty to do something about it. YOU have a choice, YOU can choose to continue to piss and moan about how lousy Congress is in chat rooms and internet blogs, or YOU can get off YOUR ass and actually make a REAL effort to change the way things are, because the Constitution gives YOU the power to speak YOUR mind. No one else is going to fight for what YOU care about unless YOU make them care by speaking YOUR mind and convincing them. The Constitution is a tool, and like any tool, YOU can choose to use it or to let it rust.
About
© 2009 Created by Randy Speeg on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
