Personally, I am getting tired of reading about this bill or that bill being considered
for passage that clearly concerns matters already covered by the Framers in the
I am convinced that any attempt to modify the content of the Constitution by assumption,
alteration, or interpretation is/are attempts to change it. Should this continue and laws
continue to be passed without being evaluated to determine whether or not they will
tend to or actually will change the intent and meaning that the Framers gave when they
crafted the Constitution, it will crumble as will the foundation of our system of laws.
The Framers crafted the Constitution in plain English. No selection of the second, third,
fourth, etc., least common uses of the words they used was done with intent to be
ambiguous. They were straight forward and to the point using the most common
meanings of words and phrases to prevent ambiguity and confusion.
Reading the Constitution may seem confusing because of our not being familiar with
some of their word craft. But, the further we read the easier it is to understand.
The Framers purposefully made the Constitution difficult to change through defining
the process for changes; amendment. Proposed amendments originate in Congress
where they must be approved by two-thirds majorities in the Senate and in the House
of Representatives. When that requirement is satisfied the proposed amendment
must be approved by three-fourths of the States by appearing on a ballot and receiving
yes votes. Then, and only then can the amendment be added to the Constitution and
integrated into our system of laws.
I have to say that nearly everything being done in the House and Senate
at this time ignores the fact that no-one but the People can change the Constitution.
Those that we have elected to serve in our stead, as servants to the public that elected
them, are violating the oaths of office that they took following their election. Those
violations are occurring more and more frequently with each day that passes.
The latest attempt that I have heard about was someone asking the Supreme Court
to define what the Framers meant when they used the word “bear” in reference to
“arms” as used in the Second Amendment.
“Amendment II: – A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
There is nothing ambiguous about the words and/or wording in this statement.
First, a well regulated Militia is stated to be necessary to the security of a free State.
Who should make up this Militia? Let’s see an explanation from those in the fore-
front of activity at that time.
“A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained in arms, is the
best most natural defense of a free country.” James Madison
There we have it,
“A well regulated militia is one composed of the body of the people”
Body of the people = a mass comprised of all the people.
“trained in arms”
Having received instructions by a person skilled in the use of arms resulting in
others becoming skilled in the use of arms.
“….is the best most natural defense of a free country.”
We all know that those with a vested interest in something are the ones in whose best
interest it is to protect that investment
“Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have
perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted,
bastardized form of illegitimate government.” James Madison
In this quote I find justification for the methods the Framers provided for
changing the Constitution. Also, what is happening to America through the
totally run amok performance of those comprising our government is described
in the quotation. Through either ignoring the original text of the Constitution and/
or separating the original text from the reasons for its construction (historical
background) we are seeing an end to our society being caused by our
bastardized form of illegitimate government.
The wisdom held by those that suffered crafting the Constitution is astounding!
Their reasoning and knowledge of the frailties of men and the need to constrain
their activities to the firm constraints that the Framers provided in the Constitution is
WE must all continually pursue each or out three members of Congress and demand
that they honor their oaths of office, always, or they will not be considered for
Actually, I don’t think any of them should be reelected ever. There is nothing in the
Constitution that provides for reelection, or can be interpreted to do so. We can
save our country by refusing to reelect all of those that comprise the old guard
Republican and Democratic Parties. They have become as one with a common
disrespect for us and for the Constitution and our country.