Thursday, May 15, 2014

Goldwater page 178

 Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 8, 2013 at 3:54pm
Delete
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 1:12pm
Delete
Color brochure flip pages
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 10:56am
Delete


FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2013

ANOTHER VOICE

Met an interesting fellow a week or so ago. Name is Andrew Joppa. He is a Viet Nam vet, a retired college professor and a defender of the United States Constitution.
The Professor lives in Naples, where he is active in an organization called The Council for Constitutional Principles.
I met him through the good offices of my dear friend and golfing buddy Frank Harris, who spends his winters in Naples and his summers at Birchwood Farms in Michigan.
Joppa is a fiery orator. Here’s a sample:
He very candidly confesses that until recently he was among those defenders of the constitution who are skeptical about an Article V Amendments Convention. Like many on the far left and the far right, Joppa feared that a convention would somehow “run away” and do violence to our founding document.
Whether it’s free speech, freedom of religion or the right to bear arms, Americans are so possessive of their rights under the federal constitution, that they literally refuse to listen to any suggestion that a convention might be necessary and useful.
Forget about the fact that nobody wants to repeal the bill of rights or mess with any one of them.
Forget about the fact that no proposal which comes out of a convention would need to be ratified by 38 states.
Forget about the fact that only 9% of the American people have confidence in the United States Congress.
The very people who don’t trust the politicians, who complain about the mess in Washington, who crab about lobbyists and public debt and interminable wars and office holders who pay no attention to their oaths to support the constitution, turn their backs on the obvious remedy the Founders provided: a convention under Article V.
Happily, Professor Joppa has come around to realize that Article V is a blessing, and he speaks cogently and passionately on the subject.
I welcome him to the Cause. America needs his enthusiasm and vigor.
Still, I have to wonder.
I have been speaking and writing on this subject for more than thirty years.
I have pretty much walked down every road that beckons our citizens to work for the calling of an Article V Amendments Convention.
And I guess I have become a little jaded.
The function of a constitution is to set down the rules of the game of governance. The purpose of an Article V Amendments Convention is to suggest changes in those rules.
Is it any wonder that the people who have come to power under the existing rules don’t want to see any of those rules changed?
Is it any wonder that Congressmen don’t want to make the House of Representatives more representative of the American people?
Is it any wonder that the Senators aren’t interested in making the United States Senate more representative of the fifty states and less beholden to the powers that be within the Beltway?
Is it any wonder that judges who have received political appointments with lifetime tenure aren’t interested in changing the way judges are chosen or how long they serve?
Professor Joppa and others hope to create a popular groundswell which will induce state legislators to demand a convention.
I wish them well, but my guess is that we will never have a convention if we wait for politicians to act.
The People have a right to an Article V convention. They don't need anyone's permission.
Thomas Jefferson said it very well: When in the course of human events...
A very good video by Andrew Joppa
Posted by Thomas E. Brennan at 7:27 PM No comments: 
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 1:42pm
Delete
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 2:22pm
Delete
Reply by Mangus Colorado on MondayDelete
 good post -
Let me add that as a CONSTITUTIONAL LITERALIST - the three branches of the Federal government are in technical usurpation of powers. The Founders - Framers - Ratifiers were very well educated and well read individuals so they had an excellent command of the language of the time . . they wrote the Constitution in language of the times that the average citizen could read and understand - the Federalist papers and the Anti Federalist papers were written to SELL the Constipation to the many State legislature so it could be ratified.  
Some will say that the Federalist papers were written to sell NY - well I find no proof of that in my readings - news paper were well traveled and read by many across the 13 Colonies. We at some point address ourselves to the ORIGINAL WORD IN THE TIME OF WRITING OF THE CONSTITUTION . . no one has found any language in the four corners or the original Document that allows any of the current operations of the Courts, Legislature or the Executive . . no they can not point to language that allow the expansion of the courts outside of Article III or or the other branches outside the limits of Article I section 8. the courts invented Judicial Review in Marbury V Madison - they usurped and then the courts usurped power again in McCullough V Maryland.
The Courts use CASE LAW PRECEDENT and British common law to seize powers not bestowed. The legislative branch nor the Executive branch took issue as they wanted the expansion of Federal Powers, , , this has ended in the current paradigm of the Central Federal Govenement and courts ignoring the rights of the Sovereign States rights and powers under the tenth amendment.  We the people must take our RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES BACK, , , they will not be consider by government. IMHO
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 6:55pm
Delete
 Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 12:00pm
Delete
Free dictionary from 1828 - know the real meanings of the words the Founders - Framers and Ratifiers used - here is an example look at the 1828 meaning of convention and then the 1913 meaning - changed did it not.
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 12:04pm
Delete
(360 B.C.) The Republic - Plato
(46 B.C.) Cicero's Brutus - Cicero

(1517) Discourses on Livy - Machiavelli
(1553) The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude - Étienne de La Boétie
(1690) Two Treatises of Government - John Locke

(1698) Discourses Concerning Government - Algernon Sydney
Sidney's Discourses and Locke's Second Treatise were recommended by Jefferson and Madison as containing the "general principles of liberty and the rights of man, in nature and society"
(1748) The Spirit of Laws  - Montesquieu

(1755) Old Family Letters - John Adams
(1758) The Law of Nations- Vattel

             The Writings of John Adams V3-4
             The Writings of John Adams V5-7
             The Writings of John Adams V8-10

(1774) Novanglus - John Adams
Principle Controversy between Great Britain and Her Colonies
(1776) Common Sense- Thomas Paine
One Incident which gave a stimulus to the pamphlet Common Sense was, that it happened to appear on the very day that the King of England's speech reached the United States, in which the Americans were denounced as rebels and traitors, and in which speech it was asserted to be the right of the legislature of England to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever.
(1776-1783) The Crisis- Thomas Paine
(1787) The Anti-Federalist(audio)
(1787) The Federalist (text) The Federalist (audio)

Madison's proposed Amendments to the Constitution
(1791-92) The Rights of Man- Thomas Paine
(1792) A Letter Addressed to the Abbe Raynal - Thomas Paine

As far as I know this is the first legal treatise written on the Constitution. Wilson was a member of the Continental Congress, signer of the Declaration, delegate to the Constitutional Convention, signer of the Constitution and a Supreme Court Justice. T. McKean was a member of the Stamp-Act Congress, Continental Congress, signer of the Declaration and the only signer of the Declaration to be the chief executive of two States and a concurrent office-holder in two States. (Both of these men's accomplishments are only touched upon in brief)
(1794-95) Age of Reason Pt. I, II and III - Thomas Paine                 





 (1805) The Dangers of American Liberty- Fisher Ames
 (1812) The Works of Adam Smith
(1820) The Republican Part I & II Part III - Wiliam Jarvis
“I thank you, Sir, for the copy of your Republican which you have been so kind as to send me… looking over it cursorily I see much in it to approve, and shall be glad if it shall lead our youth to the practice of thinking on such subjects and for themselves…”   Thomas Jefferson, September 28, 1820

A treatise on what form of Federalism was constituted by the Framers
(1829) The annals of America - Abiel Holmes
(1830) The Letters of Algernon Sydney, In Defense of Civil Liberty - Judge Spencer Roane's letters to the Richmond Enquirer, 1818-19
* [see 1868 - A Brief Inquiry....]

(1835) Democracy in America - Volume I - De Tocqueville
Designed as a First Book for Students
John Quincy Adams
(1840) Democracy in America - Volume II - De Tocqueville
(1850) The Law- Frederick Bastiat
Designed for the Instruction of Youth
(1862) Considerations on Representative Government - John Stuart Mill
A critical review of Judge Story's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States.
DESIGNED
For the Use of Schools
For the Instruction of Foreigners seeking Naturalization
For the Use of Voters
(1875) History of the United States of America: - George Bancroft
History of the United States, from the Discovery of the American Continent
covers America in depth up to 1789.
(1885) Popular Government Sir Henry Sumner Maine
The Old South Lectures for Young People were instituted in the summer of 1883, as a means of promoting a more serious and intelligent attention to historical studies, especially studies in American history, among the young people of Boston.
(1890) The Unwritten Constitution of the United States - Christopher Tiedeman
(1890) Life of the Hon. Thomas McKean - Roberdeau Buchanan
(published 1891) A Fragment on Government - Jeremy Bentham (first published in 1776)
(1894) Sources of the Constitution - C. Ellis Stevens

(1905) The John P. Branch historical papers of Randolph-Macon College - Collected works of Judge S. Roane
(1963) Burke, Paine, and the Rights of Man - R.R. Fennessy
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 6:56pm
Delete
y Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 12:06pm
Delete
PRIMARY DOCUMENTS
Letters of Delegates - Elliot's Debates - Farrand's Records


(1777) The Articles of Confederation - Agreed to by Congress 1777; ratified in 1781




            The Farrand editon  is considered to be the most complete.

              on the adoption of the Federal Constitution

Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 12:08pm
Delete
THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Bill of Rights Doctrine.docBill of Rights Doctrine.doc
169K   View   Download  
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 12:11pm
Delete



Lessons from The Five Thousand Year Leap

Lesson One 
Click Here             Quiz -Click  Here

Lesson Two 
Click Here

Lesson Three 
Click  Here

Lesson Four 
Click Here

Lesson Five 
Click Here
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 12:17pm
Delete

The Founding Fathers Remedy for Preventing a Tyrannical Government


When Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence that when a
government were to become tyrannical it would be the right and the duty of
the people to alter or abolish it.

The Framers of the Constitution wrote Article V as their method of amending the
Constitution without the necessity of having another bloody revolution. They
knew that unless the government was restrained by the chains of a
Constiitution, it would assume more power than they delegated to it.

They knew that the government could not be trusted to fix the problems that
they would create. The states created the Central government to strengthen
that states ability to defend themselves and to protect the people from
being abused by the states.

Withour the provisions of Article V, it is very likely that the Constitution would
never had been ratified. The states wanted to maintain a position of superiority
over the Central government and to allowing both the Congress and the
States to have the authority to propose amendments was one of the
very important checks and balances.

Two-thirds of the members of Congress would need to vote in favor of an
amendment before it would be sent on to the states for ratification.

Once two-thirds of the states request a convention to propose amendments to
the Constitution, Congress is required by the Constitution to call for a Convention.
If the number of states necessary request a convention and Congress refuses to
call for the convention, they are violating their oath to preserve, protect and
defend the Constitution.

If a Congressman is caught driving under the influence of alcohol should he or she
be given immunity or should they be treated the same as any other criminal.
Driving under the influence of alcohol is a crime and their are stiff
penalties for those that violate the law.


Violating the Supreme Law of the Land is also a crime, but up until now there has
been no penalty. Without a penalty, our elected representative can do
whatever thay want without be held accountable.


If violating the Constitution is a crime, the perpetrators must be arrested and put
on trial. The time has come for us to vote out all incumbents. We need to
put Congress on notice from this day forth, those that violate their oath

will be indicted breach of contract and if convicted they will forfeit
their pensions and serve time in a Federal Penitentiary.

Amend Us Constitution Website




The Meaning of Federalism


Types of Constitutional Amendments


Precedents and the Constitution


The Gtowth and Size of Government


The Commerce Clause


Commrce Clause Turning Point


Big Government and the Commerce Clause


The Heart of the Commerce Clause Debate


A Written Constitution's Karma


The Grand Marshall of the Constitution


The Restoration of the Commerce Clause


States That Have Requested An Article V Convention


Revising the Constitution by Thomas Jefferson


Phylis Schafly Deliberately Misrepresents Madison Postion of an Art...

Madison's letter was written four months before the Constitution went into effect.


He opposed a General Convention but would not have been opposed to a
Convention that was limited
to proposing Amendments. Phylis Schafly
implies that Madison was opposed to the provisons
of Article V which he
and the framers of the Constitution strongly supported. She doesn't understand
that there is a difference between a General Constitutional Convention
and an Article V Convention to Amend the Constitution.


Madison's Notes from the Constitutional Convention of 1787


Clik Here for the Cooley Law School Article V Convention Lectures


Click Here for Harvard Law School Conference


Click Here for Article V Convention Website
Visit Constitution for the United States at: http://constitutionalsheriffs.ning.com/?xg_source=msg_mes_network
 

Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 6:58pm
Delete
 Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 12:27pm
Delete
RESEARCH WEB SITES

Google Book Search - This website is my primary tool for locating the kind of book links you will find in the "Library" Page.  By default the link I've provided searchs for and provides full text 19th century documents (all free).  If you are interested in history and you have some key words you want to search for this is a outstanding resource.

Audio Books - This website offers free, downloadable audio books.  Just enter the authors name or book title in the search.  Facing a recent three hour drive I copied Thomas Paine's book "Common Sense" to my Iphone.  Best three hour drive I've had in a long time.

From Revolution to Reconstruction - This website is new to me but I'll recommend it as I've had good success pasting "qoutes" into its search to trace them back to their source document.




The Constitutional Convention - Daily Time Line Summary with Links to Text 


http://www.fullbooks.com/ - Free Ebooks



http://www.lonang.com/exlibris/library.htm - Writings in natural law



http://www.nlnrac.org/archive/topic_and_subtopic - Natural Law, Natural Rights and American Constitutionalism






http://www.fed-soc.org/ - The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies







http://www.loc.gov/rr/news/oltitles.html - Newspaper Archives/Indexes - U.S./International
http://www.timepage.org/spl/13colony.html - The history of the original 13 colonies (in brief) up to ratification of the USC. Constitutions' of the original 13 States.

Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 12:35pm
Delete
RULES FOR RADICALS
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 24, 2013 at 5:12pm
Delete
1788 Law book - searchable by word . . free from Robert Natelson, Colorado Insititute
And here is his work on Originalist -
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 6:59pm
Delete
 Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 2:00pm
Delete
STATE CONSTITUTIONS
Whereas the British Parliament, claiming of late years a right to bind the North American colonies by law in all cases whatsoever..."

"WHEREAS all government ought to be instituted and supported for the security and protection of the community as such, and to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and the other blessings which the Author of existence has bestowed upon man; and whenever these great ends of government are not obtained, the people have a right, by common consent to change it, and take such measures as to them may appear necessary to promote their safety and happiness..."

"THE parliament of Great Britain, by a declaratory act, having assumed a right to make laws to bind the Colonies in all cases whatsoever, and, in pursuance of such claim, endeavoured, by force of arms, to subjugate the United Colonies to an unconditional submission to their will and power..."

"WHEREAS, all government ought to be instituted and supported, for the security and protection of the community, as such, and to enable the individuals who compose it, to enjoy their natural rights, and the other blessings which the Author of existence has bestowed upon man..."

"Whereas the conduct of the legislature of Great Britain for many years past has been so oppressive on the people of America that of late years they have plainly declared and asserted a right to raise taxes upon the people of America, and to make laws to bind them in all cases whatsoever, without their consent; which conduct, being repugnant to the common rights of mankind, hath obliged the Americans, as freemen, to oppose such oppressive measures, and to assert the rights and privileges they are entitled to by the laws of nature and reason..."
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado on January 19, 2013 at 2:05pm
Delete

The Law of Nature

"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation..."

Have you ever wondered what "the laws of nature" are?  Were they cute words with no real meaning?  Could these words have meant something important, something we were never taught?

“A great revolution has taken place at Paris. The people of that country having never been in the habit of self-government, are not yet in the habit of acknowledging that fundamental law of nature by which alone self government can be exercised by a society. Of the sacredness of this law, our countrymen are impressed from their cradle, so that with them it is almost innate. This single circumstance may possibly decide the fate of the two nations.”
Jan 29th, 1800 Thomas Jefferson
_________________________________________________________
 (1820) The Republican Part I & II Part III - Wiliam Jarvis
“I thank you, Sir, for the copy of your Republican which you have been so kind as to send me… looking over it cursorily I see much in it to approve, and shall be glad if it shall lead our youth to the practice of thinking on such subjects and for themselves…”                                        
                                                                                          Thomas Jefferson, September 28, 1820

“To the school-boy, also, who may take pains to turn over these leaves, I can sincerely, express a wish, that he may read this book, as he ought to read all others; not with a view of adopting or rejecting, entirely, the sentiments and opinions it contains; but with a view of examining how far they may be usefully applied, in the discharge of his future duties, as a man and a citizen.” the author, William Jarvis.

Permalink Reply by Robyn Taylor on January 24, 2013 at 2:42pm
Nature comes from the latin word which  means birth. I learned that from Dr. Larry Arnn from my Hillsdale online classes.
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 9, 2013 at 7:07pm
Delete
Reply by paladin10- 19 hours ago
Quis: Thank you for your comment in support of the discussion. I'll base my opinion on several things. The Federalist papers 78-83, Hamilton says nothing about the USSC having final, sole and absolute powers of what the Constitution means or what our rights are. John Jay, the 1st USSC Chief Justice mentions nothing as to those powers of the USSC. The XI admendment mentions no such powers and finally the Constitution mentions no such powers....in fact the FF considered the USSC the least of the branches having no authority over politics and were to base ALL their opinons on Constitutional Law.
Nowhere does the Constitution give the Federal Government law enforcement ability or authority except specifically outlined in Article 1, Sec 8.  States, exclusevily have the right to make State Laws and to authorize the enforcement of such laws, the Sheriff being the prime authority to have such powers.....
The discussion of case law v constitutional law is at the very least illogical and not within the intentions nor approval of the FF. The accumulation of bad case law opinion is in conflict with itself simply because they are not consistant nor based on logic or reasonability. As an example Roe V Wade is a State issue. The USSC should never had heard the case because it had to do with State Laws, not Federal and not USSC jurisdiction......so how could they opinionate on State Law unless they ursurpted their authority....in actuality they violated States rights as well as the Constitution......jmho....good to hear from you friend....semper fi
Permalink Reply by Quisno son of the republic 8 hours ago
Check out Barron vs Mayor of Baltimore of Twining or Cruikshank or  Heller. i neec to get these PDFs done and put into here somewhere
 the 2nd amendment, the Placement of the Bill of rights and the path of the 14th amendment.
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado 1 minute ago
Delete
  • Edit   14 minutes left to edit your comment.  
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado 18 hours ago
Delete
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado 18 hours ago
Delete
P10 and others - you might want to visit this thread , . . 
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado 18 hours ago
Delete
Need a reason to get rid of the Department of Education . . . here is a common problem IMO . . 
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado 15 hours ago
Delete
Let's give up on the CONSTITUTION - IS THAT WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT . .??tHE 17TH AMENDMENT IS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS . . 
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado 15 hours ago
Delete
Permalink Reply by Mimi W 15 hours ago
Love this video.  It should be posted as well under the 17th Amendment! 
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado 15 hours ago
Delete
Done . . 
Permalink Reply by Mimi W 15 hours ago
Goody!! That is a very good place for it.  Thanks.
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 10, 2013 at 3:19pm
Delete
Permalink Reply by Mangus Colorado, Moderator on February 13, 2013 at 5:06pm
Delete
The Constitutional Topics pages at the USConstitution.net site are presented to delve deeper into topics than can be provided on the Glossary Page or in the FAQ pages. This Topic Page concerns The Preamble. The first paragraph of the Constitution provides the context for the Constitution — the "why" of the document.
The Constitution was written by several committees over the summer of 1787, but the committee most responsible for the final form we know today is the "Committee of Stile and Arrangement". This Committee was tasked with getting all of the articles and clauses agreed to by the Convention and putting them into a logical order. On September 10, 1787, the Committee of Style set to work, and two days later, it presented the Convention with its final draft. The members were Alexander Hamilton, William Johnson, Rufus King, James Madison, and Gouverneur Morris. The actual text of the Preamble and of much of the rest of this final draft is usually attributed to Gouverneur Morris.
The newly minted document began with a grand flourish — the Preamble, the Constitution's raison d'être. It holds in its words the hopes and dreams of the delegates to the convention, a justification for what they had done. Its words are familiar to us today, but because of time and context, the words are not always easy to follow. The remainder of this Topic Page will examine each sentence in the Preamble and explain it for today's audience.
We the People of the United States
The Framers were an elite group — among the best and brightest America had to offer at the time. But they knew that they were trying to forge a nation made up not of an elite, but of the common man. Without the approval of the common man, they feared revolution. This first part of the Preamble speaks to the common man. It puts into writing, as clear as day, the notion that the people were creating this Constitution. It was not handed down by a god or by a king — it was created by the people.
in Order to form a more perfect Union
The Framers were dissatisfied with the United States under the Articles of Confederation, but they felt that what they had was the best they could have, up to now. They were striving for something better. The Articles of Confederation had been a grand experiment that had worked well up to a point, but now, less than ten years into that experiment, cracks were showing. The new United States, under this new Constitution, would be more perfect. Not perfect, but more perfect.
establish Justice
Injustice, unfairness of laws and in trade, was of great concern to the people of 1787. People looked forward to a nation with a level playing field, where courts were established with uniformity and where trade within and outside the borders of the country would be fair and unmolested. Today, we enjoy a system of justice that is one of the fairest in the world. It has not always been so — only through great struggle can we now say that every citizen has the opportunity for a fair trial and for equal treatment, and even today there still exists discrimination. But we still strive for the justice that the Framers wrote about.
insure domestic Tranquility
One of the events that caused the Convention to be held was the revolt of Massachusetts farmers known as Shays' Rebellion. The taking up of arms by war veterans revolting against the state government was a shock to the system. The keeping of the peace was on everyone's mind, and the maintenance of tranquility at home was a prime concern. The framers hoped that the new powers given the federal government would prevent any such rebellions in the future.
provide for the common defence
The new nation was fearful of attack from all sides — and no one state was really capable of fending off an attack from land or sea by itself. With a wary eye on Britain and Spain, and ever-watchful for Indian attack, no one of the United States could go it alone. They needed each other to survive in the harsh world of international politics of the 18th century.
promote the general Welfare
This, and the next part of the Preamble, are the culmination of everything that came before it — the whole point of having tranquility, justice, and defense was to promote the general welfare — to allow every state and every citizen of those states to benefit from what the government could provide. The framers looked forward to the expansion of land holdings, industry, and investment, and they knew that a strong national government would be the beginning of that.
and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity
Hand in hand with the general welfare, the framers looked forward to the blessings of liberty — something they had all fought hard for just a decade before. They were very concerned that they were creating a nation that would resemble something of a paradise for liberty, as opposed to the tyranny of a monarchy, where citizens could look forward to being free as opposed to looking out for the interests of a king. And more than for themselves, they wanted to be sure that the future generations of Americans would enjoy the same.
do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America
The final clause of the Preamble is almost anti-climactic, but it is important for a few reasons — it finishes the "We, the people" thought, saying what we the people are actually doing; it gives us a name for this document, and it restates the name of the nation adopting the Constitution. That the Constitution is "ordained" reminds us of the higher power involved here — not just of a single person or of a king, but of the people themselves. That it is "established" reminds us that it replaces that which came before — the United States under the Articles (a point lost on us today, but quite relevant at the time).

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)