Understanding the U.S. Constitution part 1- 5 Key Concepts Everyone Should Know

[xtinatorres209]

Thank you for doing this! We all need to educate ourselves

[bart666a]

(s 1867)

..change title to old piece of paper

[cmseibert]

@bart666a .... do that and you can further change the TITLE of US government to - arbitrary power, rule of the elites, oligarchy, tyranny...what small vestiges of liberty still exist will finally be snuffed out. change the title of the Ameican Experiment to a liberty squandered, a liberty no more.

[cmseibert]

Glad it was a help. I hope that it might help many others as well.

[popceed]

Thank you for being a VERY hard to fine point of light in a sea of darkness.

I needed this to understand a couple of questions, and to respond to my brother, as we only minutes ago had a very heated cell phone conversation.

TY

[britney1456789]

too bad our nation doesn't follow the constitution no moaaar

[andrewhirsch]

It is true that the Constitution does not explicitly incorporate DoI. However, to deny that "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is an essential component of our national mores and we all assume that the Constitution is intended to protect such rights is also inconsistent with all that we hold dear. Therefore, it is impossible to disconnect Constitution and DoI.

[breakingelite2011]

last 52 are what you said but you missed the ending *secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and setablish this constitution FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERCA...

[breakingelite2011]

@breakingelite2011 SORRY NEVER MIND YOU GOT IT! mybad dis reguard my last comment dude im just used to ppl messing up stuff but i messed up this time im sorry ....forgive me?

[cloudbusterman]

The Constitution 1.1 confers sole legislative powers, hence the meaning of "legislative powers" becomes paramount. The word "powers" refers to both positive powers and "prevention of usurping", so powers usurping the legislation of Congress, like influential cults, corporations & special interest groups trying to secure favor or values for themselves usurps Congress. Ergo Congress is constitutionally obliged to legislate against being usurped by cults, corporations, and special interest groups.

[qwezzie]

what constituion are we speaking of, is it the "constitution FOR america" or is it the "constitution OF america", please note that these are two very different documents from what i understand.

[Hoodamanow]

Was signed on August 2 not July 4th

[mustaffa1611]

How does a piece of paper protect anyone? How do ideas protect anyone? Go tell Cochise and Geronimo and Sitting bull and Crazy horse and thier descendants about your magic piece of paper and how it protects them. Talk about fairyland ideas you believe some piece of paper is magic and protects people. This paper was forced onto people against their will. NO one had any say if they wanted this nonsense. Lose one king gain 300 more kings

[thegreenghost1000]

@mustaffa1611 hey i'm sorry the Indians got a raw deal but shit happens its best we just forget about it

[LordKaisen]

@thegreenghost1000 or better yet learn from it and move forward.

[longfootbuddy]

why you claim your rights are given by this ignored rule book of the federal government, is astounding...americans cant distinguish freedom from tyranny of government...something has made you all delusional

[Fjallgeirr]

Thank You for #sharing ! Truth #FTW

[donsaiditwoud]

Very concise and factual information. Would you please post links to the last 3 videos in this series.

[BigBagsForRent]

Awesome video. 

[3888799]

The declaration of independence was actually signed on august 2.

Continental congress voted for independence on july 2, july 4th was the day the final copy was authorized but it didnt get signed until aug 2nd. John hancock was the first to sign.

[lppoqql]

I do believe in freedom, equality and liberty, but the US is just not upholding it right now.

[cmseibert]

Thanks - I am glad it was helpful and glad you are passing it along. Hopefully you found the Part 2 of this video and the 9 Keys to Understanding the Declaration of Independence video as well.

[dreaminvasion]

I am taking PoliSci as my first college course, and this was incredibly helpful. I'll be sending links to classmates! Thanks!

[whpriol1]

This is blasphemous. The only constitution one needs is the Koran and the Hadith. Praise be to Allah. Peace be upon Him. Death to the infidel colonists and crusaders.

[dreaminvasion]

@whpriol1 This coming from someone who has a bunch of REM and Coldplay videos favorited. Trolololol. Fail.

[whpriol1]

@dreaminvasion The most merciful cousin of the Prophet, Ali Ibn Abu Talib, stated to "“Amuse yourselves for some time, for if hearts are exposed to too much strain, they turn blind.” In the Hadith, the Prophet himself stated, “O Hanzalah! Part of your time should be devoted to the worldly affairs and part of time should be devoted to prayer and meditation.” So it is not forbidden in Islam to listen to or enjoy music. This is Western propaganda. Praise be to Allah. Peace be upon Him!!

[USSWISCONSIN64]

@whpriol1 Wonder how many people actually care about what you say?

[LawRival]

#1) In 2:27 concerning the Bill of Rights the audio says" "rights of the citizens".

Are these not rights of the"People"?

Remember "citizens" are under someone. The "People" are over the Government.

Once we become "citizens" of a state or government we are under their jurisdiction.

[LawRival]

#2) The Bill of Rights only lists the rights we, the human being, are born with. We, as a people or human being, need to understand we possess substantial and unalienable rights. We give them up when we become "citizens." Then we are granted benefits and privileges from the state or government that can be taken away. Never say you are a "person" when dealing with legal matters. Always be a living, breathing, flesh and blood who has paramount ownership in yourself.

[anddenex]

Why did you change "a more perfect union" to "connect the states"?

[cmseibert]

Let me clarify my remarks... First, both the Federalist and Anti-federalist had much, much, much stronger view of the soveriegnty of the States than we do today. Ultimately being a governor of a state was a more significant responsiblity than to serve in federal office. Nonetheless, in areas of national defense and in the area some kind of uniform trade agreements with other countries, there was a need for better "connection of the states". The Articles of Confederation were viewed as to wk.

[AroundSun]

That is the problem. Because there is benevolent intent, a constitutional violation is acceptable? Its not socialism or communism if it benevolent? So long as benevolence rules the day, any respect to the limits of government go out the window? If the govt says, we don't want the freedom of speech cause some people are offended by what you say, that's benevolence. We believe we have the right to house the homeless, in your home! That is benevolence!

[enrique4086]

the bill of rights had 27 rules but i think theres more than that now 

[Kingery4President]

One of the worst ideas to plant in the minds of others who seek to understand the US Constitution is to refer to is as a ---FOUNDING DOCUMENT. It is not!

There is ONLY one UNITED STATES Founding Document, it is what people know as the Declaration of Independence, for that document CREATED the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

The Constitution (whether the Articles... or the 1787 Const... or another) are merely the By-Laws to outline government powers. It FOUNDED nothing!

[Kingery4President]

@Kingery4President The BILL OF RIGHTS (improperly named) IS NOT a list of rights the PEOPLE possess!

The "Bill of Rights" IS a list so specific rights that the People possess that the People GRANT to their government certain RESTRICTED POWERS to involve themselves as a means of fulfilling the duties outlined in the PREAMBLE.

[Kingery4President]

@Kingery4President The BILL OF RIGHTS (improperly named) IS NOT a list of rights the PEOPLE possess!

The "Bill of Rights" IS a list so specific rights that the People possess that the People GRANT to their government certain RESTRICTED POWERS to involve themselves as a means of fulfilling the duties outlined in the PREAMBLE.

STATES DO NOT POSSESS ---Rights! In the USA, States, as well as Federal Gov. are GRANTED specific powers BY THE PEOPLE.

[ggallman]

@Kingery4President - I agree with your basic concept, I think. I believe you may have over looked a concept. States ratified the Constitution of the US. The States ceded limited authority, which they possessed because the people of the state had ceded limited authority to the State. The people of the State gave the authority to the State to approve the proposed Constitution of the US. Therefore the States, under the federal government do have rights, as authorized by the people of the state.

[Kingery4President]

@ggallman When the people possess a RIGHT, they do not --delegate-- that right to the city, county, and not even to the State. What the people do, we delegate to our government certain powers and authority as that power and authority relates to our rights. Do not confuse the DECLARATION words "that States may of right do", which they MUST DO CORRECTLY --- not that they have RIGHTS. The 1787 Constitution, 10th Amendmendment mentions POWERS not delegated to the United States ---not rights.

[deec269]

We the People of this Great Nation have the oligation and duty to protect this great document. It is being dismantled little by little while everyone goes about their buisness and not paying attention. In the guise of terror they are passing laws and legislature to do away with our freedoms.

[deec269]

@deec269 The usurpers in gov are all working together to bring a new form of gov. It is called the New World Order. This henious rule that is coming is to make everyone enslaved for the elite. This has been in the works for a very long time. Our money system is a farce. It is based on nothing.

[deec269]

@deec269 At one time the only acceptable currancy was gold or silver now we have a system based on paper. The federal reserve and the the federal income tax is not federal as they would like you to believe.It is as federal as federal express.

[deec269]

@deec269 They have only tricked the people into accepting this without any vote . This is why President Kennedy was killed. He was bringing back the currency backed by gold and silver. There is much to be learned on this subject and for the mean time you can learn about it on channels like you tube. Please begin your search if you havent already. The regime of Hitler is at it again only this time they are in our gov.

[deec269]

@deec269 Thank you for this Great Information you have put together for all to learn. So many don't know anything about this wonderful document . Children are never taught this anymore something that used to be in every classroom.

[Theiammadmad]

I think American constitution is best for Americans; however, I don't necessary feel that It will be good else where just because that other nations have people with different background, cultural history and such. Although we do all share the basic human rights.

[MikeNitro94]

Is it your opinion on how to interpret "Promote General Welfare?" How would one learn how that would be interpreted in 1787? I notice you equate welfare to government handout. I would think that promote general welfare is pretty broad, and to do so would be any number of things to ensure the peace and security of the people. Surely, ensuring that the lowest people have help, would qualify. Should we trade "handouts" for more crime and suffering? Am I wrong? I want to learn but i have a worldview

[cmseibert]

@MikeNitro94 - Good question. The Founders and most of the country were steeped in Adams Smith book - Wealth of Nations - this would give you the 1787 way to interpret general welfare. In brief, what this sentence would mean is that the government should protect - people and property in order that people can earn a living in the vocation and calling of their choice. This would also allow individuals and organizations to relieve suffering and help the poor, but not the civil government.

[wormyyea]

@cmseibert Thats great that you knew the "Wealth of Nations". Most americans have never heard of the book. Great i will SUB

[andrewhirsch]

With respect, your interpretation of General Welfare is strikingly capitalistic, a notion that was just forming in the late 18th century. At that time, many of the states provided "poor" laws to protect the poor against the ills of society. It is fair to say that the laws of the states provide a better point of reference than a foreign textbook. Please note, I am a capitalist libertarian, but it is still important that we understand the true background and meaning of the Constitution's words.

[echobiz]

@andrewhirsch Yes, we must understand the supporting document for our Liberty to have any power. Capitalism is merely an exercise of trading wealth for wealth and profit. It has always been and will always be. The difference in political philosophy as I see it is:

Communists use Capitalism to fund their country and care for their slaves. Two tier society: Rich - Impoverished.

Capitalist -Circulation of wealth creates wealth in a free society.

[WesValure]

@MikeNitro94 Yes you are wrong, The lowest people get help from, Me and You!

[DrFruedienslip]

@MikeNitro94 We dont have a true constitution being based upon a true world view' how does one define a world view'

[echobiz]

@MikeNitro94 Yes, you are wrong. The reason is we have Liberty. That is an open door to opportunity. Opportunity is what drives the American Dream. Wealth has been replaced by the NANNY state or people who love handouts even if they hate them because there is never enough. There will never be enough when someone else must work to pay for other who will do nothing. Want to be wealthy? Want to live the Dream? Do something Capitalistic in nature and you may learn how dreams and wealth begin

[echobiz]

@MikeNitro94 We have Freedom, Independence as a result of Capitalism. Therefore, welfare has nothing to do with handouts. When we have a whole country on welfare; i.e. social security, government medical, etc., we have given up what this country was founded upon. As Benjamin Franklin stated, "each citizen is responsible for his own personal wealth!" That also meant debt. Our Government should have no power to redistribute wealth. When they do then a mans home is no longer his own castle!

[arbonnebycarole]

It is the best in the world dating back to Carter we have sssssssssspend too much money and buildt up a buracracy and now we the people are paying the price 2.5 ntrillion dollars under Obama alone

[swu880]

@DarkstarNV

u forget that the declaration of independence was the first legislation adopted by congress. watch:

/watch?v=7n2m-X7OIuY

/watch?v=0sNWbiAMf80

the Dec of indep. outlines the fundamental premise of natural rights. The constitution codifies it.

[esj8341]

Excellent introduction.  Thanks Mr. Seibert

[danielcooper1000]

We can never find justice at the hands of corrupt judges. (See YouTube videos) Judge to Judge on Illegal Payments to Judges / Evil Triangle of Court Corruption / Richard Fine / Dr Shirley Moore /SBX 211. The fight to end this title wave of corruption in our country must start with the corrupt judges. We can not bring evidence of corruption to corrupt judges. Los Angeles Superior Court judges are illegally and unconstitutionally taking 50,000.00 each for a total of 23 million per year.

[cmseibert]

@DarkstarNV - I agree with you first sentence. The preamble of the Constitution is its statement of purpose. However the Declaration is more than just a simple Declaration of Independence. It outlines a philosophy of government, rights, role of the citizens and role of leaders. The Constitution cannot be correctly interpreted unless the philosophy of government behind the Constitution is understood and that philosophy is in the Declaration.

[ConstitutionalTrust]

@cmseibert I stumbled on to this post and reluctantly view it thinking it to be yet another attempt to lie about the Constitution. I was presently surprised in viewing this that you are telling the truth of the Constitution. Thank you for helping spread the word.

[Standingwithfeast]

I appricate you cmsibert for the effort to share your understanding of the U.S. Constitution on youtube. This is very helpful to educate many in the U.S. who are simple minded like me. Your video is clear and to the point. I will check out your other videos and learn to memorize the first 52 words of the U.S. Constitution. If only most of the U.S citizens and the military know their U.S.Constitution then they wouldn't have blindly voted, nor obey unlawful orders. 

[Standingwithfeast]

I am not studied like cmseibert nor studied like the federalist AboveAllNations. However, I do see that If the US gov would follow and obey its US Constitution the US would have been in a much better shape that it is now. The Anti US Constitutionist will say that there are flaws in the Constititution, but there are provisions to amend it constitutionally. Yet, the US gov has been violating the Law of the Land. This is anarchy. Making up unjust laws as they go. This is bad for the US People.

[AboveAllNations]

Lots of errors and omissions in this Tea Party propaganda. First of all, the primary purpose of the U.S. Constitution was to address the impotency of the existing fed. government under the Articles of Confederation. Secondly, the "General Welfare" language in the Preamble & Article 1 allows for plenary federal spending power, as Hamilton, Washington & the Federalists understood it. Lastly, the Necessary & Proper Clause references implied powers that aren't expressly enumerated. This is BIG govt.

[cmseibert]

Note - posted to YOUTUBE before Tea Party began. Point 1) - you are correct, Point 2) you are correct - within 6 purposes of Constitution, not welfare state, point 3) - See the 10th Ammendment - powers not explicity enumerated in Federal Constitution - left to the States or to the People.  I stand by, 6 purposes of federal govt as enumerated in the preamble, the text is plainly written. Omissions - well it is only a 10m video, of course more could be said. Errors - i am just reading the text.

[AboveAllNations]

@cmseibert Plenary spending power under the General Welfare cl. allows Congress to establish federal welfare programs like social security & Medicare. While these progressive programs are consistent with the original intent of the Framers, you give no citation for your radically libertarian explanation of the phrase at 6:53. As Holmes wrote in his dissent in Lochner v. N.Y., the Constitution "is not intended to embody a particular economic theory, whether of paternalism... or of laissez faire."

[cmseibert]

You cite a 1930s judge on what he thinks the Constitution means. The Federalist papers gives abundant clarity to original intent. Moreover, George Washington, president of Constitutional convention - called government "coercive" force that is like "fire" - in that limited it is helpful, unkempt it is destructive. Your claim that the framers would embrace these "Progressive Programs" is simply wrong.

[AboveAllNations]

@cmseibert The Federalist Papers completely undermine your argument too! The whole point of the Fed Papers was to advocate for an expansion in federal power - i.e., that a "GREATER energy of government is essential to the welfare and prosperity of the [nation]." (# 26). FP # 1 accuses critics of possessing "an over-scrupulous jealousy of danger to the rights of the people," serving as "the stale bait for popularity at the expense of the public good." Have you read even read the Fed. Papers??

[AboveAllNations]

@cmseibert Hamilton's 1791 "Report on Manufacturers" is considered the authoritative understanding of the General Welfare clause. To Hamilton, "the power to raise money is plenary, and indefinite; and the objects to which it may be appropriated are no less comprehensive. ...The phrase (General Welfare) is as comprehensive as any that could have been used... because this necessarily embraces a vast variety of particulars, which are susceptible neither of specification nor of definition."

[AboveAllNations]

@cmseibert President George Washington and his treasury secretary (Hamilton) used their broad understanding of the General Welfare clause to justify an expansive list of domestic infrastructure spending - roads, canals, etc - that wasn't expressly permitted anywhere else in Article 1. The Federalists in Congress - many of them at Philadelphia in 1787 - supported this agenda. Even Tom Jefferson believed in the establishment of a National University, without express Article 1 spending authority.

[AboveAllNations]

@cmseibert Given that so many Framers (and Thomas Jefferson) supported non-enumerated federal powers, it is perfectly reasonable to expect that their Constitution would permit federal welfare programs like social security, public healthcare, and public schools to "promote the General Welfare." Thomas Paine even advocated for a system of social security substantially similar to what we have now in his 1797 pamphlet "Agrarian Justice." Look it up.

[AboveAllNations]

@cmseibert Under the 10th Amendment, states retain "powers not delegated to the [federal govt]." Delegated powers need not be "explicitly" or "expressly" delegated. Under the analogous provision in the Articles of Confederation (Article II), however, states retain "EVERY Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not... EXPRESSLY delegated to the [federal govt]." This difference was intentional, because the Necessary & Proper cl. references non-enumerated powers ("all OTHER powers vested...").

[AboveAllNations]

@cmseibert You note yourself that the Constitution was only 4500 words long when ratified; it couldn't possibly have intended to explicitly detail every permissible exercise of federal power for all of perpetuity. Instead, the Constitution is a broadly-written charter of government powers and individual rights - both express and implied. As the Committee of Detail noted in 1787, the Constitution includes "essential principles only," with "simple and precise language, and general propositions..."

[cmseibert]

@AboveAllNations - Let's clarify your position.

1) where do rights come from?

2) what do you think the purpose of government is?

3) more people have been killed by their governments in the last century than in all the wars of the last century -

4) how are citizens protected from their government?

5) when do we know that government is to big?

[AboveAllNations]

@cmseibert Responding to your last set of questions would take too much space. I intend to make a Youtube video explaining my interpretation of the U.S. Constitution around New Year's. For your information, I'm a liberal law student who has studied the Constitution and American History extensively. To be brief, I believe that the internal separation of powers is the great genius of the American Constitution. In other words, it is not the SIZE of government that matters, but its COMPOSITION.

[cmseibert]

@AboveAllNations - i am glad you are studying the Constitution and Am.Hist.extensively. I have too. I have read the Federalist papers. I am sorry you felt inclined to be derisive about whether I had read them or not. I think your answers to these questions are HIGHLY relevant - 1) where do rights come from? 2) what is the purpose of government? 3) how do citizens protect themselves from their government and a new one 4) what is the nature of man? I look forward to your answers in your video

[chozencphoto]

Don't you mean; The Constitution FOR the united States of America. Not OF!

[MrNDUDE16]

Hey don't tell me what part to watch. I can't start with part 5 if I want.

[EBanonymous]

My last commenthere.1 David Barton's "history" is far from neutral & you assumed I was black when you offered it. - I know his work

I'm not against Christians; I disagree with the crimes people commit who use the term: the wars, Genocides, slave trade - the churches were involved PLEASE dispute it. Barton & ur links promote it

u bioth mislead for the rich: Madison said the Senate prevents redistribution of wealth & that's ur goal to keep the rich rich.

Jesus said help the poor -u do opposite

[cmseibert]

@EBanonymous

1 Ur tone is more reasonable. thx.

2.I too h8 crimes committed in name of"Christiany"

3.what form of government do you recommend?

4. U assume i am a christian, i never state that

5. U assume I am rich or well off, i am not

6. U assume i don't help the poor, i have very much out of my own time and money and believe it is my job, not the governments

7. William Wilberfore as a Christian spent his whole life to abolish the slave trade - i admire him 4that.

8. thx 4 UR post.

[EBanonymous]

@cmseibert

I can't propose solutions in the current framework of politics. U specifically list July4th Freedom & the 21 day Faith Exp - esp* biblical worldview training. I (look at their test) I've checked them & Barton. They're whole purpose is to argue against redistribution of wealth, citing the founders.

I was wrong about U & apologise. But if u help the poor, y do u promote their messages? This is y i assumed u were like them & opposed to the poor - because those guys r.

[gilbygil11]

As a constitutional scholar (attorney) who has spend many, many years studying not only the text of the constitution but, more importantly, how it has been interpreted through judicial review by the many layers of courts of this country, I can state unequivocally that the declaration of independence has no legal authority. It was not adopted by the many states (as the Constitution was) but only by a handful of representatives. They could not bind the colonies to its message.

[cmseibert]

@gilbygil11 - The point I am trying to make is that the DOI is the animating philosophy of government that the Constitution enshrines. The Constitution would be like a corpse without the animating life principles that the DOI speaks to. Lincoln, aptly desribed the Constitution as [The Silver Frame that surrounds the Apple of Gold [the Declaration]].

[gilbygil11]

Remember that the Declaration was intended to be read to soldiers as inspiration for carrying out a war with England. Jefferson, Jay and Franklin were less interested in explaining the source of true authority for a government and more interested in justifying waging war with England.

The best justification and basis for authority for the federal government is the preamble. It states the source of the federal government's power and its intended purpose.

[MikePresents2]

@gilbygil11, I'm not a constitutional scholar and that caught my attention also.

I would think that the Articles of Confederation and the inability of the Federal Government to pay the debt had more to do with the Constitution than the Declaration of Independence.

Another question I have (though I'm not sure of the significance) is this -

Is it "The Constitution for the united states of America" or "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA"?

[gilbygil11]

As a constitutional scholor (attorney) who has spend many, many years studying not only the text of the constitution but, more importantly, how it has been interpreted through judicial review by the many layers of courts of this country, I can state unequivocally that the declaration of independence has no legal authority. It was not adopted by the many states (as the Constitution was) but only by a handful of representatives. They could not bind the colonies to its message.

[ivasenko48]

Bah ... Americans are too stupid for a constitution to be effective.

[cmseibert]

I defer to Fredrick Douglass. He was an African American freed from slavery during this time period. He decided to study it for himself. He researched the Constitution and the founders and then came to an opposite view of yours. He has credibility to me. He studied it deeply, and changed his view. Anyone wanting to learn about this for themselves should pick up the book - American History in Black and White by David Barton. It will be an eye opener on the history of racism in America.

[EBanonymous]

@cmseibert

I read Douglass work, and respect his opinion very much. But I don't agree with him on that.

To say that Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3 supported slavery because it requiered the govt to go after runaway slaves is correct & you can check it. The 14th Amend changed it.

You miss the point. I spoke about slavery, not racism. Slavery was economic not racaim, though that played a major factor. My comment would make more sense if you posted it instead of censoring it - 1st Amend

[EBanonymous]

@cmseibert

If you're really interested in a serious discussion, then you won't make a video about a set of laws (which includes free speedh), and then censor comments you don't like.

Many researchers have reached very different conclusions from Douglass; the "founders" were not interested in human rights (slavery is an egregious violation), and they did the Genocide of the indigenous peoples.

It's not I who has the eyes closed to history or racism. It's those who cesnor it like you.

[cmseibert]

@EBanonymous

This book sets the record straight.

"American History in Black and White" by David Barton.

[EBanonymous]

@cmseibert

The "Christian" who is a Republican supporter & advocate of extreme right wing religious ideology? THAT is your historian? LOL What a piece of rubbish on the level of ur video.

"Black" history isn't slavery in the US. Africa goes back long before Greece & the "Anglos" who couldn't even write until about 100CE

Notice how you put 1 comment here. What about the rest? Ah, had to censor my other comments because you didn't want others to read them. So much for "freedom of speech"

[cmseibert]

@EBanonymous

You state on your channel that you are a "woman fighting racism in all of its forms". From your first comment on this channel you have called people scum, mocked points that have been made and not been open to disucssion, then complained about "freedom of speech." if some of your crass remarks were removed. This is called being a bully. I invite anyone reading this post to click over to your profile and make their own assessment based on comments from others.

[EBanonymous]

@cmseibert

Barton's attempt to teach 'black history' is pathetic. Slavery isn't 'black' history', it's urs. African history goes back before Greece was a concept. The church authorised it in 1455 papal bull. Ur Barton Christain book is about race, not my comments.

I said ur viedo is "rubbish". U show only what you want people to see & that's why you left out my other 3 comments. They weren't "bullying" - they exposed your nonsense for what it is. People can judge? with only 1/2 my comments?

[cmseibert]

@EBanonymous - I invite anyone who wants to look at comments from others on your channel and make their own assessment of where you are coming from. Apparently you have been hurt by either white people or Christians as you have little respect for both. I am sorry that that has happend to you. Your use of words like - pathetic - rubbish - and the accusations you level at others is unfortunate as it reveals a lot of hate. I would encourage you to seek some forgiveness in your heart.

[EBanonymous]

@cmseibert

I'm Irish & I was a Catholic - u keep talking about race

U "Christians" committed Genocide of the Pequots in 1637, 1667 & Washington in 1779 & Jefferson too - for their land & inspired Hitler - See John Toland

You "Christians" ignore Jesus message & invade Iraq & Aghanistan on total lies for oil & control & use this "founders" argumet. Constitution isn't from 'god'! Why do u worship it? Ur corporate sponsored ideology for profit & control.

U people have nothing to do w Jesus

[cmseibert]

@EBanonymous - I am sorry, but you continue to be a "cultural bully" here. I think this is good for others to observe. I invite anyone who wants to look at comments from others on your channel and make their own assessment of whether you are a bully or not.

I have cited one book from an author you do not like, yet you have not read the book that i know of, then you continue with your accusastions. This is what a "culturally bully" is. Free speech does not mean letting "bullys" go on &on.

[nw5052001]

understanding the constitution should be a should be taught in school...the tyranny will persist until everyone is informed. only the ones who know it can manipulate and corrupt it..yet almost all people dont know it and can be influenced by propoganda, campaigns,arrogance,etc... there is no excuse to not teach it to the people it should be the most important piece of knowledge people hold.. there will be no fairness until all are able to make informed decisions..Teach your children!

[OutsidrArtst]

The consitutution does not seem to be protecting us from the conjoined powers of corporations and government.......times are dark.....

[nw5052001]

@OutsidrArtst i never read the constitution but i think the most important part about it is the right it gives us to protect it.

[jsegelke01]

@OutsidrArtst the constitution was not meant to protect but be protected. hence the right to keep arms. its our duty as humans, not americans to protect it. it was meant for every man, woman, and child that came legally to this country.

[2big4TX]

GOD BLESS THE USA!

[thespacialone]

I see you have "people" capitalized, but not "posterity". I believe it is important, because if one is not aware that the People, as opposed the people, designed it for their Posterity, as opposed posterity, the reasons behind the drafting of the document are not understood.

[seattlescottb]

I appreciate your simple, thoughtful description of the Constitution. I am astounded that this has only had 7,601 views. It should be 7,000,000 views. I am going to view the other parts and then forward the like to everyone I know. Again, thank you!

[Lenangreal]

americans

i like your consitution, i think its the best consitution of the world

sadly here in europe we dont have something similar

[nw5052001]

@Lenangreal We are having to fight to keep it now, give us some support please

[ha38bb1]

@Lenangreal not doing much 4 us these days tho.... revolution or surrender pick your side.

[elwaponino]

@Lenangreal start by getting your guns back, and remove the Queen. She even has power in Canada and Australia. And that about the U.S. Constitution, is only beneficial if WE THE PEOPLE take action, and become vigilant with our rights again, then it's only a piece of paper. It all starts with the Peole to tell the government WHO"S BOSS, or the government will tell you how it is, and we are now seeing the police state of America, and if we're not careful, become FULLY FASCIST. MIchael Badnarik

[wethepeople2013]

@Lenangreal don't worry, our corrupt goverment violates our rights her in the USA every day meanwhile preaching freedom to the world. They are not to be trusted.

[ghos7bear]

@Lenangreal constitution means shit

[everythingeco]

Funny, all this talk about violations in the constitution (of which I blame both sides) and this video has only 7,000 views.

I searched "The US Constitution" and this was the first video explaining it, the second has only 812 views.

I'm going to play with search terms, but I think that says something. I don't think the majority of citizens understand this document, only the way their party preference interprets it to it's people.

American Fail

[xtaxplayer]

@everythingeco Sadly I agree with you. It is up to us to keep, make, the people knowledgeable. You see in order for the federal government to have the power it greedily wants, the people must not know what their right's are. If people knew their rights the government couldn't get involved in our schools or lives. Why, you ask? Because of the Constitution and the jurisdictional limits place on it. So far the Supreme Court has upheld the Constitution when laws are correctly brought forth to them.

[xtaxplayer]

@everythingeco Sadly I agree with you. It is up to us to keep, make, the people knowledgeable. You see in order for the federal government to have the power it greedily wants, the people must not know what their right's are. If people knew their rights the government couldn't get involved in our schools or lives. Why, you ask? Because of the Constitution and the jurisdictional limits place on it. So far the Supreme Court has upheld the Constitution when laws are correctly brought forth to them.

[roxxphatcox]

To bad the patriot act renders this document useless. The Americans have no rights, its defined by what the president allows them to do or not.

America per definition would be a lenient dictatorship.

[CRJarvis]

@roxxphatcox only an amendment can change the Constitution.

and the patriot act can not over ride the Constitution if we do not let it.

Bush started it (and i was againt it) Obama extended it's reach and made it permanent.

[roxxphatcox]

@CRJarvis I`m not sure what you mean about "If we don`t let it" .

And I am a bit concerned witnessing the suppression of civil liberties

in the US. The governing authority is given more power and the people

subsequently less. Combine this with a economy in free fall and a

dollar on the same route. Hopefully there are many more ppl like you Crjarvis

to stop this from getting out of hand.

[MrNukesftw]

Very informative

[mrichman]

Thank you for clarifying point 5. Progressives and the uneducated take the word "welfare" the wrong way.

[dundura123]

i like the fact that you have qualified point 5...but if you are going to go down that route..you need to qualify all the points..for example in point 3...i don't think it meant preemptive strikes in foreign countries that might potential in some undetermined future date attach America...

[dundura123]

thanks you so much for this video...the most informative 8 minutes and 24 seconds i have spent in years...which is sort of sad considering how important this is...

[Kingery4President]

Finally,

At least one other person who understands how to understand the Constitution and the united States Founding Charter.