A top-down central Federal Government will always be anathema to the rights and liberties of a free people! We don't need a central Federal Government...what we need is Local and State Governments that are in agreement as a loose Confederation of States for the common defense (Militia) and a Navy. That's it!
What's difficult for people to grasp...especially when you were raised being told we were a free nation, a Republic, etc...is that what we are told and what the Constitution says it does are most often than not two different things...unfortunately. This is why Patrick Henry said it was "Masked Aristocracy." He believed correctly that our Constitution would create a ruling class underhandedly by design by slowly, because of it's very loose language, undermine the authority of the States and the people. Over time it would lead to all power being handed over or given into the hands of a few. As our Constitutional history demonstrates, there were not proper safeguards against the States and or We the People unwittingly handing over our sovereignty to those legislators who would be bought and paid for by lobbyists. There was no Constitutional oversight for the most obvious (of course hind-sight is always clearest) of dangers...such as how to deal with those who would negate their oath of office for example. If there had been oversight in even that one area built into the language of the Constitution, it would have been a much more reasonable document.
As we read the Supremacy Clause together, I am sure you will see (now that you are aware of the danger many of our Founding Fathers saw back during the ratification process) how, as a natural progression, the Constitution was designed to "Centralize" power in Washington D.C. Let's read it together..."This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the Supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." This Supremacy Clause alone is very draconian in nature and does the one thing that Alexander Hamilton said it would not...create a Central Federal Power that would strip the States of all power. Now, we still hear all the time via media pundits like Sean Hannity or that other mind bending "Constitutional Scholar" Mark Levin...that States Rights always trump the FED. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard this...but the reality is much different I'm afraid. In reality, if a state like, say Texas, decides it wants to enforce "Its" laws for border control, all DC does is threaten to send in the military to stop them...and they would be 100% Constitutional in doing so apparently!
The bottom line is that if the Constitution were really designed to safeguard the Liberty of We the People, it would have. But from the very beginning, it did not! Read up on the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791 as a perfect example of how...right out of the shoot...the newly founded government was being used as a hammer to beat down the Liberty of We the People and trample States Rights.
Agreed...having said what I said, I am definitely NOT in favor of having another Constitutional Convention. The amendment process is the solution I think. So many common sense amendments could make what we have so much better. The first thing would simply be Term Limits!
A top-down central Federal Government will always be anathema to the rights and liberties of a free people! We don't need a central Federal Government...what we need is Local and State Governments that are in agreement as a loose Confederation of States for the common defense (Militia) and a Navy. That's it!
Kinda wish the States had never created the Federal Govt, but doesn't the Constitution provide for it?
What's difficult for people to grasp...especially when you were raised being told we were a free nation, a Republic, etc...is that what we are told and what the Constitution says it does are most often than not two different things...unfortunately. This is why Patrick Henry said it was "Masked Aristocracy." He believed correctly that our Constitution would create a ruling class underhandedly by design by slowly, because of it's very loose language, undermine the authority of the States and the people. Over time it would lead to all power being handed over or given into the hands of a few. As our Constitutional history demonstrates, there were not proper safeguards against the States and or We the People unwittingly handing over our sovereignty to those legislators who would be bought and paid for by lobbyists. There was no Constitutional oversight for the most obvious (of course hind-sight is always clearest) of dangers...such as how to deal with those who would negate their oath of office for example. If there had been oversight in even that one area built into the language of the Constitution, it would have been a much more reasonable document.
As we read the Supremacy Clause together, I am sure you will see (now that you are aware of the danger many of our Founding Fathers saw back during the ratification process) how, as a natural progression, the Constitution was designed to "Centralize" power in Washington D.C. Let's read it together..."This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the Supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." This Supremacy Clause alone is very draconian in nature and does the one thing that Alexander Hamilton said it would not...create a Central Federal Power that would strip the States of all power. Now, we still hear all the time via media pundits like Sean Hannity or that other mind bending "Constitutional Scholar" Mark Levin...that States Rights always trump the FED. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard this...but the reality is much different I'm afraid. In reality, if a state like, say Texas, decides it wants to enforce "Its" laws for border control, all DC does is threaten to send in the military to stop them...and they would be 100% Constitutional in doing so apparently!
The bottom line is that if the Constitution were really designed to safeguard the Liberty of We the People, it would have. But from the very beginning, it did not! Read up on the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791 as a perfect example of how...right out of the shoot...the newly founded government was being used as a hammer to beat down the Liberty of We the People and trample States Rights.
Fortunately the Founders had the foresight to make it amendable
Agreed...having said what I said, I am definitely NOT in favor of having another Constitutional Convention. The amendment process is the solution I think. So many common sense amendments could make what we have so much better. The first thing would simply be Term Limits!