The Constitution's very brevity makes it particularly intolerant of any sort of I-know-best absolutism. Instead, it invites — practically mandates — debate and reinterpretation, making the idea of ‘Constitutional Conservativism’ a near-oxymoron.
@Daelyn75 Not true. All we want is freedom, justice and equality for everyone. We dont want people to be discriminated against because of who they are or what they believe. We want everyone to have the same rights. Because those are the priciples America was founded on ---- LIBERALISM!!!
@shotsky94 That is the theory that attracts people to begin with and that ignorant people believe on general purpose but like all establisment approved moments today what is under the hood is not what is on the surface. Take for instance identity politics and special interest groups which are a core of modern liberalism.
@shotsky94 Liberals of today are nothing like they were to the founding fathers or even what liberalism was a few generations ago. Modern liberalism is about breaking down all national boundries and destroying the concept of nation states to foster global governance, so that all people everywhere have the same rights to your land and can freely move about anywhere. Further, modern liberalism heavily advocates special group interests and privilages to the detriment of the majority.
@shotsky94 wow you really haven't a clue what today's liberals really want do you? Freedom and equality is specifically not what they want. Is freedom taking from me and giving to someone else? Wonder why so many have their eyes open and cant see anything?
"READY AMES FIRE" money Bomb July 19th!!! Ron Paul will not seek re-election to congress, says he is all in for PRESIDENT!!! Please Donate and promote..if not us who my friends?
@shotsky94 they were liberals, but in the classical sense. Classical liberalism is the same as libertarianism. Grover Cleveland was a "liberal" as well, but unlike today's progressives, he was probably one of the most recognizable Presidents in limiting the growth of government.
"...and for either left or right to concede in any manner that our nation's founding charter simply doesn't matter is not only a permanent recipe for unlimited government but negates the entire purpose of even having a constitution in the first place." Southern Avenger-Jack Hunter. Great informative message.
I'd rather vote for David Duke than any of the GOP tards! And demoncrats are NO opinion either. If Bachman really believed in our founding forefathers Constitution then she would NOT be in agreement with Foreign Aid to ANY country or fighting wars that have nothing to do with protecting America's sovereignty but rather another nation and empire building! And that is NOT isolationism, as both parties would have one believe!
The nice thing about our Constitution is it can be changed legally and peacefully by We the People. No one can say what Jefferson or Washington would think today. I assume they would not want to go backwards or join the far Right anti government agenda to increase the wealth of the few at the expense of the many. They were not that easily fooled.
@337noname LOL if you only understood economics you would know that the anti government agenda is the very thing that would dismantle multinational corporations as upstarts would not have all the regulations imposed on business solely to kneecap competition. Look up juicer bills,also known as milker bills. And we can get a relatively good idea of what the founders would think today through their own writings.
0:45 You are still getting it wrong. Secession (of States) is not the same as Revolution (of the People). 0:50 Misleading. Jefferson was a die-hard secularist.
It's not because they do not know what it means, it's because they do not give a flying fuck about it. They just pander to their gullible and dim rightwing base.
A better label for Michelle Bachmann is Selective Constitutionalists. That being said, I'm not surprised why she of all people is using the label "Constitutional Conservative". Congresswoman Bachmann has hired the same Strategy Group for Media that worked for both Ron Paul and Rand Paul. She clearly is a false prophet send to divide and conquer.
Can someone please tell me what is wrong with this guys arguments,Les Leopold, progressive. Punish the bankers and elites who are ruining our country. and empower the middle class, while attempting to raise the poor to middle class,seems a good solution to me, and i thought I was a Libertarian. I cant seem to post the link to the vid here, but he is all over YouTube.
I have to disagree that Jefferson and Washington would have been religious fanatics. Both started out as christian, but towards the end of the revolution they were deists. It's even debated that Jefferson was an atheist.
She wants to use the federal government to ban Porn!!!! Obviously not a Constitutional Position. She is an Opportunist, like every other politician. Well all but one.
The only Republican constitutional conservative in the presidential race is Ron Paul. Michele Bachmann is a social conservative (Christian religious nut) and NOT by any measure a fiscal or constitutional conservative. A vote for her is like voting for papal rule! At least Ron Paul attempts to keep his superstition out of his politics.
What is the point of your question? Bill Maher is simply one of the social progressive liberals at the other end of the teeter-totter; he is just as bad as Bachmann; he thinks the money you earn belongs to the government.
How can you tell when a politician is lying? Her lips are moving. Michele Bachmann voted to renew the (UN) Patrito Act. So she is a conservative? No way!
Jack: Your clear vision and powerful insights are very refreshing in this age of big government programs and axe wielding "conservatism". Thanks for the discourse. Keep it up.
@19TEC85 As imperfect as it may be, as a Canadian I envy Americans for the constitution they have. The Canadian constitution comes with a 'not withstanding' clause, such that the government can pass any law it wants and as long as the law says "not withstanding the constitution", it is constitutional. They 'said' it would only be used in the most dire of circumstances, but has in fact been used for issues as trivial as the language on parking tickets.
@sleedolfine15 Mostly that it helped birth a strong centralized state, the document IMO gives the govt way too much power, and has not done such a great job in restraining govt.
@19TEC85 Actually,the constitution did a pretty good job of restraining the federal government until Lincoln launched an illegal war against the southern states and used force of arms to overthrow the old constitutional republic and replace it with an all powerful,consolidated government. The orginal constitution is no more and will not be restored until the states regain the right of nullification & if that doesn't work secession. Obamacare might be a good test case for state's nullification
Bachmann may not be perfect but she's the most conservative electable Republican. As much as I like Ron Paul, he is NOT going to be elected president. Rand Paul maybe one day, but NOT Ron Paul. So if we have to choose between Romney and Bachmann, I'd much rather Bachmann.
@paleocon23 You are missing a very important point. You DON'T have to choose between Romney and Bachmann. This isn't a horse race. Its not about "picking a winner". That's the game that's gotten us big government "winners" both Republican and Democrat alike. Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Hermain Cain, etc. may not be electable. So what? Since when is being electable more important than being RIGHT?
@paleocon23 Ron Paul IS electable. Bachmann is not. She cannot beat Obama. Paul can easily defeat Obama if he can just get past Republican primary voters.
@paleocon23 Gary Johnson is at least as electable as Bachmann, who comes with a load of baggage that makes her 'extremely' unattractive to many moderate independents, the very ones that would swing an election. The choice is NOT between Romney and Bachmann.
And the other thing is so what if she is electable (she isn't)? What have you gained if you 'win' with someone with whom you strongly disagree and who will not get the job done?
I think it's a mistake to lump Rand Paul in with his father, (a greater man). Rand Paul's support for the US Constitution does not extend as far as the POWs in Cuba.
Unlike his father he's somewhat 'a la carte'.
It's just that more of the US constitution suits his philosophy than it does other politicians.
It shocks me how many liberals call Ron Paul a loony based on his constitutional stance on the issues. They would rather have America terrorise the world as long as they continue to get their public benefits. They've become pathological.
Give it up, Jack. Limited Government is an oxymoron. The Constitution has no authority. Quit supporting the false hope of minimal statism. Anarcho-capitalism is the only way to go.
@BobbyW3363 Yes, and you will all drop out of the political process and bask in how superior your philosophy is. Meanwhile the other 99.9% of the world will go right on without you for generation after generation, and nary a one of you philosophically superior anarchists will do one bloody thing to make the world a better place for this generation and our children. Indeed, some of you actively oppose progress towards liberty on the absurd notion that it makes it easier for the state to grow.
The constitution has become the neighborhood slut for the republicans and their party rhetoric. There are very few people in congress, and probably less in the senate, who genuinely view the constitution as the supreme law of the land. I will give Bachmann this; it takes alot of balls (ovaries?) to claim fidelity to the constitution one hand, and openly support the "patriot" act on the other. Anyway, great video. I'm looking forward to the next one.
And I don't think Bachmann's line is bad either, the problem is her social views make it impossible to follow. I think her christian right views are as stupid and hollowly "American" as apple pie, beer, and flag waving are as you eloquently state as what an American means in the opening post. Good video
I think people few the Constitution as anything credible or binding anymore. Jefferson himself said that constitutions should be rewritten frequently but i don't trust any idiot today to create one
@lockwoodisafaggot I know right? He was like the Christopher Hitches of his day, and damn near all the other founding fathers were deists who heavily criticized Christianities roll in the tyranny that Europe experienced for 1500 years under Christian rule.
Not to mention its the law: Treaty of Tripoli article 11 unanimously voted in to law by congress and John Adams in 1797. "The U.S. Gov't is not, in ANY SENSE, founded upon the Christian Religion."
If they want to keep shitting on The Constitution, coordinate an event to go shit on their front lawns one by one. If you're too embarrassed to drop trou in public... bring your dog...horse...pig...goat.... or you could just store it in a bucket!
Southern states should seriously consider cessation. Here in Australia, some states have already suggested this in a response to our out of control federal spending.
@Panax07 This was a metaphorical way of saying that the dear congresswoman from Minnesota can't keep her positions straight. Or to paraphrase Forrest Gump, "Michele Bachmann's political stances are like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get."
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul is the true constitutional conservative!
freakylocz14 5 months ago
The Constitution's very brevity makes it particularly intolerant of any sort of I-know-best absolutism. Instead, it invites — practically mandates — debate and reinterpretation, making the idea of ‘Constitutional Conservativism’ a near-oxymoron.
scarface82us 6 months ago
only constitutional conservative i see running is Ron Paul.
skatelongboards 7 months ago 3
Consitutional Conservatives = J Team propaganda to mislead more whites
MrHappy702 7 months ago
@Daelyn75 Not true. All we want is freedom, justice and equality for everyone. We dont want people to be discriminated against because of who they are or what they believe. We want everyone to have the same rights. Because those are the priciples America was founded on ---- LIBERALISM!!!
shotsky94 7 months ago
@shotsky94 That is the theory that attracts people to begin with and that ignorant people believe on general purpose but like all establisment approved moments today what is under the hood is not what is on the surface. Take for instance identity politics and special interest groups which are a core of modern liberalism.
See: Mark Steyn on Free Speech
Daelyn75 7 months ago
@frionelhero Anyways, they were still liberals. And they wanted freedom and equality just like liberals today do.
shotsky94 7 months ago
@shotsky94 Liberals of today are nothing like they were to the founding fathers or even what liberalism was a few generations ago. Modern liberalism is about breaking down all national boundries and destroying the concept of nation states to foster global governance, so that all people everywhere have the same rights to your land and can freely move about anywhere. Further, modern liberalism heavily advocates special group interests and privilages to the detriment of the majority.
Daelyn75 7 months ago
@shotsky94 wow you really haven't a clue what today's liberals really want do you? Freedom and equality is specifically not what they want. Is freedom taking from me and giving to someone else? Wonder why so many have their eyes open and cant see anything?
Raimunelar 7 months ago
@Raimunelar We want freedom and equality for everybody. Cons just want freedom for rich white people.
shotsky94 7 months ago
@Southernjuggalo63 NOT TRUE!
shotsky94 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"READY AMES FIRE" money Bomb July 19th!!! Ron Paul will not seek re-election to congress, says he is all in for PRESIDENT!!! Please Donate and promote..if not us who my friends?
AmericanValues321 7 months ago
@masterriftsgm That's because the founders were liberals. The country was found on liberalism not fascism
shotsky94 7 months ago
@shotsky94 not technicly cause liberals in the founding fathers time is way different than the wacko liberals we have now
Southernjuggalo63 7 months ago
@shotsky94 they were liberals, but in the classical sense. Classical liberalism is the same as libertarianism. Grover Cleveland was a "liberal" as well, but unlike today's progressives, he was probably one of the most recognizable Presidents in limiting the growth of government.
frionelhero 7 months ago
"...and for either left or right to concede in any manner that our nation's founding charter simply doesn't matter is not only a permanent recipe for unlimited government but negates the entire purpose of even having a constitution in the first place." Southern Avenger-Jack Hunter. Great informative message.
megaprinciples 7 months ago
Radical right-wingers will never succeed!
shotsky94 7 months ago
@shotsky94 That's what the King George III likely said, too.
masterriftsgm 7 months ago
I'd rather vote for David Duke than any of the GOP tards! And demoncrats are NO opinion either. If Bachman really believed in our founding forefathers Constitution then she would NOT be in agreement with Foreign Aid to ANY country or fighting wars that have nothing to do with protecting America's sovereignty but rather another nation and empire building! And that is NOT isolationism, as both parties would have one believe!
GlobalMinority 7 months ago
The nice thing about our Constitution is it can be changed legally and peacefully by We the People. No one can say what Jefferson or Washington would think today. I assume they would not want to go backwards or join the far Right anti government agenda to increase the wealth of the few at the expense of the many. They were not that easily fooled.
337noname 7 months ago
@337noname LOL if you only understood economics you would know that the anti government agenda is the very thing that would dismantle multinational corporations as upstarts would not have all the regulations imposed on business solely to kneecap competition. Look up juicer bills,also known as milker bills. And we can get a relatively good idea of what the founders would think today through their own writings.
dirtbagstatus 7 months ago 2
@337noname Get back in your cave troll.
lautzutao 7 months ago
@lautzutao I can't tell if you're being ironic or moronic.
337noname 7 months ago
0:45 You are still getting it wrong. Secession (of States) is not the same as Revolution (of the People). 0:50 Misleading. Jefferson was a die-hard secularist.
therealaj123 7 months ago
It's not because they do not know what it means, it's because they do not give a flying fuck about it. They just pander to their gullible and dim rightwing base.
therealaj123 7 months ago
and or chuck baldwin would be another choice besides the Pauls
mike1988123 7 months ago
@mike1988123
But first he needs to rejoin the Republican Party and work his way from the inside out.
shiftstart 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Bachmann talking about the Constitution is pretty hilarious.
zeroeffects88 7 months ago
Comment removed
zeroeffects88 7 months ago
Jack,
A better label for Michelle Bachmann is Selective Constitutionalists. That being said, I'm not surprised why she of all people is using the label "Constitutional Conservative". Congresswoman Bachmann has hired the same Strategy Group for Media that worked for both Ron Paul and Rand Paul. She clearly is a false prophet send to divide and conquer.
shiftstart 7 months ago
@shiftstart I totally agree with you Michelle Bachmann voted yes on the Patriot act renewal that alone puts her out in my mind
MMACHMP 7 months ago
I read that Bachmann signed a pledge that if elected she'd support a ban on porn.
heylover3 7 months ago
Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels- Samuel Johnson
GrayGhost8 7 months ago 7
Can someone please tell me what is wrong with this guys arguments,Les Leopold, progressive. Punish the bankers and elites who are ruining our country. and empower the middle class, while attempting to raise the poor to middle class,seems a good solution to me, and i thought I was a Libertarian. I cant seem to post the link to the vid here, but he is all over YouTube.
Bblackjackk 7 months ago
I have to disagree that Jefferson and Washington would have been religious fanatics. Both started out as christian, but towards the end of the revolution they were deists. It's even debated that Jefferson was an atheist.
xtremejohnny69 7 months ago
@xtremejohnny69 Later on in life he believed in a Higher Power but he was more in line with the Unitarians of the 18th century.
GrayGhost8 7 months ago
She wants to use the federal government to ban Porn!!!! Obviously not a Constitutional Position. She is an Opportunist, like every other politician. Well all but one.
robrigo80 7 months ago
Au contraire, gentlemen, the choice is always between Ron Paul and everyone else.
MrGuvnah 7 months ago
The only Republican constitutional conservative in the presidential race is Ron Paul. Michele Bachmann is a social conservative (Christian religious nut) and NOT by any measure a fiscal or constitutional conservative. A vote for her is like voting for papal rule! At least Ron Paul attempts to keep his superstition out of his politics.
MsWanderer1 7 months ago
@MsWanderer1 Bill Maher?
bull864 7 months ago
@bull864
What is the point of your question? Bill Maher is simply one of the social progressive liberals at the other end of the teeter-totter; he is just as bad as Bachmann; he thinks the money you earn belongs to the government.
MsWanderer1 7 months ago
@MsWanderer1 OK I guess this isn't Maher. Thought you might be for a second, but you redeemed yourself with your comment somewhat.
bull864 7 months ago
How can you tell when a politician is lying? Her lips are moving. Michele Bachmann voted to renew the (UN) Patrito Act. So she is a conservative? No way!
megaprinciples 7 months ago 2
Love these videos! Keep them coming.
ShiversRSS 7 months ago
Jack: Your clear vision and powerful insights are very refreshing in this age of big government programs and axe wielding "conservatism". Thanks for the discourse. Keep it up.
jeffreyhsykes 7 months ago 6
Bachmann is a fundamentalist loon.
MagnusIan 7 months ago 2
The constitution sucks.
19TEC85 7 months ago
@19TEC85 As imperfect as it may be, as a Canadian I envy Americans for the constitution they have. The Canadian constitution comes with a 'not withstanding' clause, such that the government can pass any law it wants and as long as the law says "not withstanding the constitution", it is constitutional. They 'said' it would only be used in the most dire of circumstances, but has in fact been used for issues as trivial as the language on parking tickets.
Count your blessings.
Panpiper 7 months ago
@19TEC85 What don't you like about the constitution? Your comment did not make that clear.
sleedolfine15 7 months ago
@sleedolfine15 Mostly that it helped birth a strong centralized state, the document IMO gives the govt way too much power, and has not done such a great job in restraining govt.
19TEC85 7 months ago
@19TEC85 Actually,the constitution did a pretty good job of restraining the federal government until Lincoln launched an illegal war against the southern states and used force of arms to overthrow the old constitutional republic and replace it with an all powerful,consolidated government. The orginal constitution is no more and will not be restored until the states regain the right of nullification & if that doesn't work secession. Obamacare might be a good test case for state's nullification
sleedolfine15 7 months ago
Did Michele clarify which constitution she believed in. Knowing her I assumed it was Israel's.
Ponerology 7 months ago 3
Bachmann may not be perfect but she's the most conservative electable Republican. As much as I like Ron Paul, he is NOT going to be elected president. Rand Paul maybe one day, but NOT Ron Paul. So if we have to choose between Romney and Bachmann, I'd much rather Bachmann.
paleocon23 7 months ago
@paleocon23 You are missing a very important point. You DON'T have to choose between Romney and Bachmann. This isn't a horse race. Its not about "picking a winner". That's the game that's gotten us big government "winners" both Republican and Democrat alike. Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Hermain Cain, etc. may not be electable. So what? Since when is being electable more important than being RIGHT?
kevinjoubert 7 months ago
@paleocon23 Nonsense!
goodinohio 7 months ago
@paleocon23 Ron Paul IS electable. Bachmann is not. She cannot beat Obama. Paul can easily defeat Obama if he can just get past Republican primary voters.
fsujag54 7 months ago 2
@paleocon23 Gary Johnson is at least as electable as Bachmann, who comes with a load of baggage that makes her 'extremely' unattractive to many moderate independents, the very ones that would swing an election. The choice is NOT between Romney and Bachmann.
And the other thing is so what if she is electable (she isn't)? What have you gained if you 'win' with someone with whom you strongly disagree and who will not get the job done?
Panpiper 7 months ago
@Panpiper I should read other people's replies before making my own, lest I wind up repeating what others have already said.
Panpiper 7 months ago
Its not a bad obsession my friend.
judoskeleton 7 months ago
I think it's a mistake to lump Rand Paul in with his father, (a greater man). Rand Paul's support for the US Constitution does not extend as far as the POWs in Cuba.
Unlike his father he's somewhat 'a la carte'.
It's just that more of the US constitution suits his philosophy than it does other politicians.
christianpatriot125 7 months ago
It shocks me how many liberals call Ron Paul a loony based on his constitutional stance on the issues. They would rather have America terrorise the world as long as they continue to get their public benefits. They've become pathological.
thejobloshow 7 months ago
I love that last shot. Washington looking at Obama in the back ground. You can almost hear him saying "This guy. This F'n guy...."
benhmn 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul 2012
rachelabombdotcom 7 months ago
Give it up, Jack. Limited Government is an oxymoron. The Constitution has no authority. Quit supporting the false hope of minimal statism. Anarcho-capitalism is the only way to go.
BobbyW3363 7 months ago 2
@BobbyW3363 Yes, and you will all drop out of the political process and bask in how superior your philosophy is. Meanwhile the other 99.9% of the world will go right on without you for generation after generation, and nary a one of you philosophically superior anarchists will do one bloody thing to make the world a better place for this generation and our children. Indeed, some of you actively oppose progress towards liberty on the absurd notion that it makes it easier for the state to grow.
Panpiper 7 months ago
The constitution has become the neighborhood slut for the republicans and their party rhetoric. There are very few people in congress, and probably less in the senate, who genuinely view the constitution as the supreme law of the land. I will give Bachmann this; it takes alot of balls (ovaries?) to claim fidelity to the constitution one hand, and openly support the "patriot" act on the other. Anyway, great video. I'm looking forward to the next one.
K20ej88 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul 2012! Michele Bachman blah blah blah blah. Shut the fuck up Michele.
LeifEiriksson 7 months ago 2
Comment removed
LeifEiriksson 7 months ago
Comment removed
LeifEiriksson 7 months ago
And I don't think Bachmann's line is bad either, the problem is her social views make it impossible to follow. I think her christian right views are as stupid and hollowly "American" as apple pie, beer, and flag waving are as you eloquently state as what an American means in the opening post. Good video
Drac39 7 months ago 2
I think people few the Constitution as anything credible or binding anymore. Jefferson himself said that constitutions should be rewritten frequently but i don't trust any idiot today to create one
Drac39 7 months ago
"
Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814
lockwoodisafaggot 7 months ago 3
Jefferson a religious nut? More like he'd be viewed as a rotten atheist by the Christian conservative bunch. And Bachmann is a total idiot,,,
lockwoodisafaggot 7 months ago 4
@lockwoodisafaggot I know right? He was like the Christopher Hitches of his day, and damn near all the other founding fathers were deists who heavily criticized Christianities roll in the tyranny that Europe experienced for 1500 years under Christian rule.
Not to mention its the law: Treaty of Tripoli article 11 unanimously voted in to law by congress and John Adams in 1797. "The U.S. Gov't is not, in ANY SENSE, founded upon the Christian Religion."
CelticAlphabet 7 months ago
If they want to keep shitting on The Constitution, coordinate an event to go shit on their front lawns one by one. If you're too embarrassed to drop trou in public... bring your dog...horse...pig...goat.... or you could just store it in a bucket!
PennywisePatriots 7 months ago
I always look forward to your articles. Excellent as always!
bsg1206 7 months ago
We should have a rating system give a percentage of Constitutional Conservatism to each elected employee in Washington DC.
TrentFillmore 7 months ago
Southern states should seriously consider cessation. Here in Australia, some states have already suggested this in a response to our out of control federal spending.
LibertyDownUnder 7 months ago
@treez78 aye. Up at 3am reading articles and watching Ron Paul vids. Bit of an obsession. But a good one =P
LeJimster 7 months ago 32
Michele Bachmann is a Constitutionalist on Monday, but a 4th Amendment hating Neocon on Tuesday. I can't trust that sort of inconsistency.
hellsunicorn 7 months ago 83
@hellsunicorn Which Monday was this?
Panax07 7 months ago
@Panax07 This was a metaphorical way of saying that the dear congresswoman from Minnesota can't keep her positions straight. Or to paraphrase Forrest Gump, "Michele Bachmann's political stances are like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get."
hellsunicorn 7 months ago
@treez78 me2 =)
LeJimster 7 months ago