Why Do We Have A Constitution?
Posted by KingShamus on July 31, 2011
Sometimes it’s necessary to get back to first principles. Courtesy of the great Mind-Numbed Robot.
Our Constitution was not instituted to save us from ourselves. Our Constitution was written, mainly, to protect us from our government. It’s time we remembered that and elect people who understand it as well. The alternative is not one worth savoring.
Read the rest. It’s got some great stuff on Steve Winn’s Obama turn-around.
Why is the Constitution’s true purpose so vitally important? Two things.
Rep. David Wu (D-Ore.) announced Tuesday that he will resign from Congress, four days after a report that a young woman called his office complaining of an “unwanted sexual encounter” with the congressman.
“I cannot care for my family the way I wish while serving in Congress and fighting these very serious allegations,” Wu said in a statement. “The well-being of my children must come before anything else.
This is the right decision for my family, the institution of the House, and my colleagues.”
The congressman, who said he will formally resign at the conclusion of the debt-limit debate, had said Monday that he would not seek reelection next year. But congressional leaders had called for an ethics investigation, and both of his home state’s Democratic senators on Tuesday morning called for his resignation.
Watch out, private sector. The former congressman is…frisky.
Mayor Bloomberg, the mayor who declared war on tobacco, sugary drinks and trans fats, has identified a new public enemy — now he wants to protect New Yorkers from salt.
Health Commissioner Dr. Thomas Farley launches a campaign today to cut New Yorkers’ sodium intake by one-fifth over five years.
“If we achieve our goal, we would talk about saving tens of thousands of lives,” Farley said, predicting that deaths from strokes and heart attacks will dramatically fall.
The City Health Department is spearheading the National Salt Reduction Initiative, which will cajole food manufacturers to voluntarily cut sodium content 20 to 25 percent by 2014.
You can argue with the nebbish nanny state instincts of Nurse Mike, but at least he has science on his side, right?
A dash of doubt was added Wednesday to Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s assault on salt.
He’s made it one of the calling cards of his administration. But now a new study is taking the idea of cutting sodium with a grain of salt, reports CBS 2′s Scott Rapoport.
He’s been the anti-salt mayor, preaching the hazards of too much salt in food. He’s tried to get restaurants and food manufacturers to use less of it. It has all culminated with the city plastering ads warning of heart attacks related to too much salt.
“Would you like to live longer? My suggestion is don’t overdo the salt,” Bloomberg once said.
But a new analysis in the American Journal of Hypertension is now casting skepticism.
“It’s hard to know who to believe when they come out with these tests,” one New Yorker told Rapoport.
The report found little significant evidence that eating more salt would shorten one’s life, and that people on salt-controlled diets didn’t live longer than people on normal healthy diets, leaving some to say the city may have gone overboard in the war on salt.
“To do it across the board with everybody … it’s a bit too much,” said Dr. Franz Messerli, the director of the hypertension program at St. Luke’s Roosevelt Hospital.
Mike Bloomberg, pictured here doing something completely healthy unlike the sinful denizens of his mayoral fiefdom, is not just a pushy chestless runt of man. He’s not just the latest in a long line of secular puritans that are at odds with America’s founding leave-me-alone spirit. He’s also just as closed-minded as any stereotypical Bible-thumping creationist strawman found in a Richard Dawkins atheist pud-wack essay. He’s got it in his head that sodium is a killer–and that his laws are the best way to get people to follow his idea of a ‘proper’ diet–so it’s only natural that he’d pump the food police legislation despite the facts being against him. The only difference between Bloomberg’s lifestyle diktats and any religious teaching is…well, nothing…if you really think about it.
Which brings us back to the US Constitution. Properly understood, the founding governmental charter of America is not a living breathing document that can be changed at the whim of politicians. It is a piece of writing meant to keep the government from changing America into a dictatorship. Humans: so willing to engage is unethical behavior, so quick to follow intellectual fads rather than real knowledge; David Wu and Mike Bloomberg are exactly the type of rotten characters the Constitution is meant to limit.
Let’s face facts. We are governed by weirdos and fascists. Wu and Bloomberg are just two of the more egregious examples. Why should we give vile people like this any more authority or power over our lives than the Constitution already does? Why should we let them twist the Constitution into knots just to satisfy their own egos?
The members of our government can barely manage their own lives. They’re not right on even a quarter of what they think they know. So of course that means they get to criminally mismanage our money and tell us what to do because they know better than we do.
Let’s get back to Constitutional limits. Let”s roll back the powertrip our creepy asshole leaders have been running on for almost a century. It’s the only way we can keep the likes of David Wu and Mike Bloomberg (and Barack Obama and John McCain for that matter) in their proper place.