Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No....the totalitarians who stole America.
From whom? Lincoln? Polk? Jackson? Adams? Washington? Who did the "totalitarians" steal if from?
Those who believe/believed that the US Constitution is/was the law of the land.
Those who believe/believed that the US Constitution is/was the law of the land.
Well, if you believe hard enough... you may trick yourself into believing that it ever has been the case... even though it has not.
If you ignore the truth, you may be oblivious to the Emperor Franklin the First reducing the Constitution to tatters.
Still criticizing America, are ya?
No....the totalitarians who stole America.
From whom? Lincoln? Polk? Jackson? Adams? Washington? Who did the "totalitarians" steal if from?
From whom? Lincoln? Polk? Jackson? Adams? Washington? Who did the "totalitarians" steal if from?
Those who believe/believed that the US Constitution is/was the law of the land.
So can you name actual names, there are only so many presidents and at this juncture it sounds like you have Lincoln in mind. Yep, Abe sure stretched the Constitution but he said Congress would back him up and later and it did. I wonder how historians will judge Lincoln?
Well, if you believe hard enough... you may trick yourself into believing that it ever has been the case... even though it has not.
If you ignore the truth, you may be oblivious to the Emperor Franklin the First reducing the Constitution to tatters.
You seem to be under the impression that we have had a president who followed the Constitution to the letter. But the fact of the matter is that it has never been the case.
And while were at it, when you were a kid, and lost a tooth, and got money under your pillow; actually that came from your parents.
sorry, thems the facts of life
Well, if you believe hard enough... you may trick yourself into believing that it ever has been the case... even though it has not.
If you ignore the truth, you may be oblivious to the Emperor Franklin the First reducing the Constitution to tatters.
You seem to be under the impression that we have had a president who followed the Constitution to the letter. But the fact of the matter is that it has never been the case.
And while were at it, when you were a kid, and lost a tooth, and got money under your pillow; actually that came from your parents.
sorry, thems the facts of life
From whom? Lincoln? Polk? Jackson? Adams? Washington? Who did the "totalitarians" steal if from?
Those who believe/believed that the US Constitution is/was the law of the land.
So can you name actual names, there are only so many presidents and at this juncture it sounds like you have Lincoln in mind. Yep, Abe sure stretched the Constitution but he said Congress would back him up and later and it did. I wonder how historians will judge Lincoln?
Those who believe/believed that the US Constitution is/was the law of the land.
So can you name actual names, there are only so many presidents and at this juncture it sounds like you have Lincoln in mind. Yep, Abe sure stretched the Constitution but he said Congress would back him up and later and it did. I wonder how historians will judge Lincoln?
Theodore J, Lowi, The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States
Theodore Lowi, a political science eminence at Cornell University, years ago drew a bead on what was wrong with the American polity. In his The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States, he claimed that the Founder's constitution of 1787 had been surreptitiously replaced with a new one by the FDR administration, and no one had actually noticed it for seventy-plus years.
In current argot, we have been operating under US Constitution, 2.0 since the Roosevelt era. The contours of the constitution of this "Second Republic" as he deemed it, bears some scrutiny, as the Obama Administration and the 112th Congress go to work bringing even more change--possibly US Constitution 3.0. The preamble and first article of the actual constitution we have been living under, which Lowi acutely discerned, suffice to show where an Obama constitution will be taking off from. Archived-Articles: America's Third Republic?
Though the Constitution of the Second Republic is unwritten, here is Lowi's "sketch" of its essential outlines:
PREAMBLE. There ought to be a national presence in every aspect of the lives of American citizens. National power is no longer a necessary evil; it is a positive virtue.
Article I. It is the primary purpose of this national government to provide domestic tranquility by reducing risk. This risk may be physical or it may be fiscal. In order to fulfill this sacred obligation, the national government shall be deemed to have sufficient power to eliminate threats from the environment through regulation, and to eliminate threats from economic uncertainty through insurance.
Article II. The separation of powers to the contrary notwithstanding, the center of this national government is the presidency. Said office is authorized to use any powers, real or imagined, to set our nation to rights making any rules or regulations the president deems appropriate; the president may delegate this authority to any other official or agency. The right to make all such rules and regulations is based on the assumption in this constitution that the office of the presidency embodies the will of the real majority of the American nation.
Article III. Congress exists, but only as a consensual body. Congress possesses all legislative authority but should limit itself to the delegation of broad grants of unstructured authority to the president. Congress must take care never to draft a careful and precise statute because this would interfere with the judgment of the president and his professional and full time administrators.
Article IV. There exists a separate administrative branch composed of persons whose right to govern is based on two principles: (1), the delegations of power flowing from Congress; and (2), the authority inherent in professional training and promotion through an administrative hierarchy. Congress and the courts may provide for administrative procedures and have the power to review agencies for their observance of these procedures; but in no instance should Congress or the courts attempt to displace the judgment of the administrators with their own.
Article V. The Judicial branch is responsible for two functions: (1), to preserve the procedural rights of citizens before all federal courts, state and local courts, and administrative agencies; and (2), to apply the Fourteenth Amendment of the 1787 Constitution as a natural-law defense of all substantive and procedural rights. The appellate courts shall exercise vigorous judicial review of all state and local government and court decisions, but in no instance shall the courts review the constitutionality of Congresss grants of authority to the president or to the federal administrative agencies.
Article VI. The public interest shall be defined by the satisfaction of the voters in their constituencies. The test of public interest is reelection.
Article VII. The public interest to the contrary notwithstanding, actual policy making will not come from voter preferences or congressional enactments but form a process of tripartite bargaining between specialized administrators, relevant members of Congress, and the representatives of self-selected organized interests. Principalities And Powers: Goodbye Liberalism: Hello Socialism
according to polichic, hindsight is 20/20, anyone living at the time was wrong.
So can you name actual names, there are only so many presidents and at this juncture it sounds like you have Lincoln in mind. Yep, Abe sure stretched the Constitution but he said Congress would back him up and later and it did. I wonder how historians will judge Lincoln?
Theodore J, Lowi, The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States
Theodore Lowi, a political science eminence at Cornell University, years ago drew a bead on what was wrong with the American polity. In his The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States, he claimed that the Founder's constitution of 1787 had been surreptitiously replaced with a new one by the FDR administration, and no one had actually noticed it for seventy-plus years.
In current argot, we have been operating under US Constitution, 2.0 since the Roosevelt era. The contours of the constitution of this "Second Republic" as he deemed it, bears some scrutiny, as the Obama Administration and the 112th Congress go to work bringing even more change--possibly US Constitution 3.0. The preamble and first article of the actual constitution we have been living under, which Lowi acutely discerned, suffice to show where an Obama constitution will be taking off from. Archived-Articles: America's Third Republic?
Though the Constitution of the Second Republic is unwritten, here is Lowi's "sketch" of its essential outlines:
PREAMBLE. There ought to be a national presence in every aspect of the lives of American citizens. National power is no longer a necessary evil; it is a positive virtue.
Article I. It is the primary purpose of this national government to provide domestic tranquility by reducing risk. This risk may be physical or it may be fiscal. In order to fulfill this sacred obligation, the national government shall be deemed to have sufficient power to eliminate threats from the environment through regulation, and to eliminate threats from economic uncertainty through insurance.
Article II. The separation of powers to the contrary notwithstanding, the center of this national government is the presidency. Said office is authorized to use any powers, real or imagined, to set our nation to rights making any rules or regulations the president deems appropriate; the president may delegate this authority to any other official or agency. The right to make all such rules and regulations is based on the assumption in this constitution that the office of the presidency embodies the will of the real majority of the American nation.
Article III. Congress exists, but only as a consensual body. Congress possesses all legislative authority but should limit itself to the delegation of broad grants of unstructured authority to the president. Congress must take care never to draft a careful and precise statute because this would interfere with the judgment of the president and his professional and full time administrators.
Article IV. There exists a separate administrative branch composed of persons whose right to govern is based on two principles: (1), the delegations of power flowing from Congress; and (2), the authority inherent in professional training and promotion through an administrative hierarchy. Congress and the courts may provide for administrative procedures and have the power to review agencies for their observance of these procedures; but in no instance should Congress or the courts attempt to displace the judgment of the administrators with their own.
Article V. The Judicial branch is responsible for two functions: (1), to preserve the procedural rights of citizens before all federal courts, state and local courts, and administrative agencies; and (2), to apply the Fourteenth Amendment of the 1787 Constitution as a natural-law defense of all substantive and procedural rights. The appellate courts shall exercise vigorous judicial review of all state and local government and court decisions, but in no instance shall the courts review the constitutionality of Congresss grants of authority to the president or to the federal administrative agencies.
Article VI. The public interest shall be defined by the satisfaction of the voters in their constituencies. The test of public interest is reelection.
Article VII. The public interest to the contrary notwithstanding, actual policy making will not come from voter preferences or congressional enactments but form a process of tripartite bargaining between specialized administrators, relevant members of Congress, and the representatives of self-selected organized interests. Principalities And Powers: Goodbye Liberalism: Hello Socialism
One person's opinion and meaningless.
Theodore J, Lowi, The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States
Theodore Lowi, a political science eminence at Cornell University, years ago drew a bead on what was wrong with the American polity. In his The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States, he claimed that the Founder's constitution of 1787 had been surreptitiously replaced with a new one by the FDR administration, and no one had actually noticed it for seventy-plus years.
In current argot, we have been operating under US Constitution, 2.0 since the Roosevelt era. The contours of the constitution of this "Second Republic" as he deemed it, bears some scrutiny, as the Obama Administration and the 112th Congress go to work bringing even more change--possibly US Constitution 3.0. The preamble and first article of the actual constitution we have been living under, which Lowi acutely discerned, suffice to show where an Obama constitution will be taking off from. Archived-Articles: America's Third Republic?
Though the Constitution of the Second Republic is unwritten, here is Lowi's "sketch" of its essential outlines:
PREAMBLE. There ought to be a national presence in every aspect of the lives of American citizens. National power is no longer a necessary evil; it is a positive virtue.
Article I. It is the primary purpose of this national government to provide domestic tranquility by reducing risk. This risk may be physical or it may be fiscal. In order to fulfill this sacred obligation, the national government shall be deemed to have sufficient power to eliminate threats from the environment through regulation, and to eliminate threats from economic uncertainty through insurance.
Article II. The separation of powers to the contrary notwithstanding, the center of this national government is the presidency. Said office is authorized to use any powers, real or imagined, to set our nation to rights making any rules or regulations the president deems appropriate; the president may delegate this authority to any other official or agency. The right to make all such rules and regulations is based on the assumption in this constitution that the office of the presidency embodies the will of the real majority of the American nation.
Article III. Congress exists, but only as a consensual body. Congress possesses all legislative authority but should limit itself to the delegation of broad grants of unstructured authority to the president. Congress must take care never to draft a careful and precise statute because this would interfere with the judgment of the president and his professional and full time administrators.
Article IV. There exists a separate administrative branch composed of persons whose right to govern is based on two principles: (1), the delegations of power flowing from Congress; and (2), the authority inherent in professional training and promotion through an administrative hierarchy. Congress and the courts may provide for administrative procedures and have the power to review agencies for their observance of these procedures; but in no instance should Congress or the courts attempt to displace the judgment of the administrators with their own.
Article V. The Judicial branch is responsible for two functions: (1), to preserve the procedural rights of citizens before all federal courts, state and local courts, and administrative agencies; and (2), to apply the Fourteenth Amendment of the 1787 Constitution as a natural-law defense of all substantive and procedural rights. The appellate courts shall exercise vigorous judicial review of all state and local government and court decisions, but in no instance shall the courts review the constitutionality of Congresss grants of authority to the president or to the federal administrative agencies.
Article VI. The public interest shall be defined by the satisfaction of the voters in their constituencies. The test of public interest is reelection.
Article VII. The public interest to the contrary notwithstanding, actual policy making will not come from voter preferences or congressional enactments but form a process of tripartite bargaining between specialized administrators, relevant members of Congress, and the representatives of self-selected organized interests. Principalities And Powers: Goodbye Liberalism: Hello Socialism
One person's opinion and meaningless.
Rather than attempt to identify any errors in Lowi's theisis, you simply dismiss his lifetime of study and well-deserved reputation as 'meaningless'?
How very Liberal of you.
No, actually, yours are the excuses of a dupe who needs to find a rationalization to excuse the illegality of FDR.
No, actually, yours are the excuses of a dupe who needs to find a rationalization to excuse the illegality of FDR.
Is this the "postmodern doubt" that we heard about in the OP?
You can't have it both ways. Either our country was guided by some sort of divine providence, OR the entirety of our history has been a cautionary tale in the excesses of democracy. You need to figure out which narrative you're gonna stick with, because the two are not compatible.
One person's opinion and meaningless.
Rather than attempt to identify any errors in Lowi's theisis, you simply dismiss his lifetime of study and well-deserved reputation as 'meaningless'?
How very Liberal of you.
I'll leave the research to people more qualified than me. How many plots, conspiracies, attempts to turn America into a communist, fascist, socialist, feudalistic, mercantilistic, monarchist, dictatorship have there been on these boards? Each post offering indisputable evidence of the takeover, but as one poster said, after all these years it still seems to be here. Now you offer evidence that it's all not here, it's in a pawn shop in Moscow. Just too many conspiracies and talk of doom for me to get excited.
No, actually, yours are the excuses of a dupe who needs to find a rationalization to excuse the illegality of FDR.
Is this the "postmodern doubt" that we heard about in the OP?
You can't have it both ways. Either our country was guided by some sort of divine providence, OR the entirety of our history has been a cautionary tale in the excesses of democracy. You need to figure out which narrative you're gonna stick with, because the two are not compatible.
Why?
There is free will in my view.
FDR exercised it in a self-gratifying manner.
You, in a non-thinking manner.
Is this the "postmodern doubt" that we heard about in the OP?
You can't have it both ways. Either our country was guided by some sort of divine providence, OR the entirety of our history has been a cautionary tale in the excesses of democracy. You need to figure out which narrative you're gonna stick with, because the two are not compatible.
Why?
There is free will in my view.
FDR exercised it in a self-gratifying manner.
You, in a non-thinking manner.
You disapproved of the outcome of the four electoral landslides?
Sounds like a "failure to recognize it as the victory of our values, and of our culture."
Under the Constitution there are three co-equal branches of government, yet, under FDR that ceased to be the case. He co-opted the Supreme Court, which then upheld the confiscation and arbitrary revaluation of the price of gold, and the cancellation of mortgage debt both plainly violations of the Constitutions Contract Clause.
