10th Amendment, bias, constitution, corruption, documents, false, first amendment, fraud, health care, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, lies, news media, opinion, pandering, political correctness, propaganda, relativism, scandal

Has anyone at Time Magazine ever read the U.S. Constitution? Ever?

Thirteen Clear Factual Errors in Richard Stengel’s Essay on the Constitution (And I Am Looking for Your Help)
June 28, 2011 by Aaron Worthing

Late last week, I fisked Richard Stengel’s Time Magazine cover story “One Document, Under Seige” (update: click here for the one page version) but it deserves more discussion. I consider it nothing less than a journalistic scandal that this piece was (1) a cover story, (2) written by their Managing Editor, (3) who serves in an organization dedicated to teaching other journalists about the Constitution, and yet it is rife with factual errors, including many that are obvious simply by reading the Constitution.

My mistake in the last post on the subject was trying to catalogue everything wrong with it, leading me to take issue with his philosophy, too and thus what got lost for some was the simple fact that Stengel was clearly factually wrong on many points, often when the facts could be determined by doing nothing more than reading the Constitution.

So this time, we are going to focus solely on the factual errors. There are thirteen of them and like the lawyer that I am, I will start off with his most egregious error and end with the least egregious. Here are the thirteen errors, in short:

The Constitution does not limit the Federal Government.
The Constitution is not law.
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment emancipated the slaves.
The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment granted the right to vote to African Americans.
The original Constitution declared that black people were to be counted as three-fifths of a person.
That the original, unamended Constitution prohibited women from voting.
Inter arma enim silent leges translates as “in time of war, the Constitution is silent.”
The War Powers Act allows the president to unilaterally wage war for sixty days.
We have only declared war five times.
Alexander Hamilton wanted a king for America.
Social Security is a debt within the meaning of Section Four of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Naturalization depends on your birth.
The Obamacare mandate is a tax.
When I am done with this post, I am going to make a bleg where I ask you to try to help get out the word about this egregiously incorrect cover story. So stay tuned to the end (or jump ahead if you feel like it).

But first here, point-by-point, is proof that each one of those statements are errors.

read the full article here

10th Amendment, bias, constitution, corruption, documents, false, first amendment, fraud, health care, ideology, indoctrination, left wing, liberalism, lies, news media, opinion, pandering, political correctness, propaganda, relativism, scandal

10th Amendment, american, constitution, favorite, government, history

Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian?

Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian?
March 1951, by Murray N. Rothbard (hat tip to Tenth Amendment Center)

The people must constantly keep their Government small and local, and even then must watch it with great vigilance lest it run amok. That is the great Jeffersonian lesson, and it is one that all Americans must begin to learn again.

From this basic cornerstone, the rest of the Jeffersonian edifice is easily deduced. It explains his passionate, lifelong adherence to States’ Rights, his determined opposition to John Marshall in the latter’s successful campaign to make the Constitution more elastic so as to permit wider extension of federal power, his very distrust of the Constitution itself and insistence upon incorporating a Bill of Rights.

10th Amendment, american, history, government, constitution

10th Amendment, bias, government, left wing, liberalism, news media, video

Liberals don’t understand federalism

CNN’s Costello: States’ Rights is Like ‘Asking the Children to be the Parents’
July 31, 2009 by Matthew Balan

CNN correspondent Carol Costello aired a fair report on Friday’s American Morning about the several states which passed resolutions that asserted their rights under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and asked for viewer responses on the issue, but later stated that her “favorite [viewer] comment so far…‘asking for states’ rights is asking, you know, the children to be the parents’”

10th Amendment, bias, government, left wing, liberalism, news media, video

10th Amendment, constitution, government, states rights

The 10th Amendment was great idea

The 10th Amendment was great idea
July 25, 2009 by Original America

Should a people blindly trust their government? I worry that as long as Democrats control the Congress and the Presidency the answer is yes. Apparently even disagreeing with Democrats is considered unpatriotic:

Despite all logic, the many calls and efforts for the federal government to take over as much of the private sector as possible seem to be met with little resistance. Thankfully there is growing conservative resistance to federal takeover, a takeover which many Americans would call a Marxist or Socialist movement. This resistance includes grassroots Republicans, Democrats and others alike, all in the name of the Tenth Amendment. This “second revolution” as some call it has spread even to state legislatures and governors, evidenced by their publicly reclaiming the constitutionally recognized sovereignty of their states, also citing the 10th Amendment to the constitution.

10th Amendment, constitution, government, states rights

10th Amendment, constitution, freedom, government, states rights

A Party We Can Trust

A Party We Can Trust
July 20, 2009 by Original America

Let’s face it, presently there is no effective difference between the Republican and Democrat parties. The end results of their agendas are essentially the same: moving the United States toward Marxism. The pace at which this tragedy occurs is of little relevance.

Since the 2006 elections, when Democrats took control of both chambers of Congress, it has been widely said the conservative movement is dead. This concept was bolstered with the 2008 elections, with Democrats again picking up more seats in the House and Senate, not to mention the Presidency. For a matter of months after that there were many suggestions the losses suffered by the Republican Party proved it should abandon its conservative base. There were also statements such as “The Reagan era is over.” Thankfully, the left wing narrative does not establish the reality of the situation.

Conservatives have been analyzing and investigating the past two elections as well. Right wing understanding of Republican losses is strikingly different from the left wing calls for Republicans to essentially remake themselves in the image of Democrats. Conservative think tanks, pundits, commentators and the like seem to have reached a consensus on the fact that the nature of the Republican Party is in flux, but there are many theories as to what this actually means.

10th Amendment, constitution, government, freedom, states rights

10th Amendment, constitution, government, politics, states rights

The 17th Amendment and the Balance of Federal Power

The 17th Amendment and the Balance of Federal Power
July 16, 2009 by Original America

From my grassroots perspective I see a great deal of frustration among conservative voters. Some have given up on the political process by ignoring current events, and some outright refuse to vote any more. In trying to figure out what has exasperated so many grassroots conservatives I believe I have found a common theme. The greatest frustration seems to be so many Republicans appear to be no different from Democrats. True or not, this seems to be the perception.

For many conservatives the idea that Republicans elected to office (federal or state levels) tout their ability to slow the progress of a left wing agenda seems like a shallow victory, at best. Then there are calls for the Republican Party to abandon its conservative origins and embrace a more moderate attitude, which is precisely the approach Senator John McCain employed to lose the 2008 presidential election.

And now with the sprint toward Marxism that has caught the nation there are concerns over where federal power will end, if ever. One question I have is, if federal power continues to usurp individual and states rights, does it matter anymore if Republicans win governorships or seats in Congress?

In any case, the battle to take back our country is, of course, multi-faceted. I have a proposal on the matter.

politics, constitution, states rights, 10th Amendment, government