We Need to Conserve the Spirit of ’76

todayMay 5, 2009

share close


Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  Don’t tell me you’re trying to conserve the Constitution using the Supreme Court’s convoluted interpretations of it of the last 50 years.  I actually heard, and we have this digital media file, Chrissy Hissy-Fit Matthews had Sheldon Whitehouse, a senator, and Orrin Batten the Hatch, a senator, on “Spitball” yesterday.  And he was asking them about Supreme Courts, about Obama’s upcoming SCOTUS choice.  [Mimicking Chris Matthew]  “Well, how do you think that [indiscernible] Supreme Court decisions.  And it’s apparent to me Americans by and large have signed off on Brown v. Board of Education and all these – and then Roe v. Wade and all these other ones.”  They have?  Why have they?  What’s the point?  Where’s the constitutionality of any of those decisions?  Brown v. Board of Education was actually decided based on the difference between a black baby doll and a white baby doll, for God’s sake.  That’s constitutional jurisprudence?  No, it’s not.  It’s manufactured.  It is an amendment to the Constitution that was never ratified, but it was ratified by nine thieves in black robes.  Ditto that for Roe v. Wade and all the other ones.

So answer the question again.  What are you trying to conserve?  What?  I would view, or I view, the definition and the purpose of conservatism is to conserve the republican form of government that is written into the Constitution, that it is our job to conserve the spirit of ‘76.  Know what that is?  It was the animating purpose of the American Revolution.  Why did we break with the King?  Why did we – King George III.  Why did we break with Parliament?  Because we were tired of being ordered about  by a distant government, a central distant government in a faraway land.  Couple thousand miles away.  We viewed that to not be a representative form of government.  And so we rebelled against it, and here we are today.  Thankfully, here we are today.

Need MORE Tao of Dude-Mike Church Show transcripted brilliance? Then support this site and become a 24/7 BackStage Pass Subscriber and you can read them all! Recent Tao of Dude – The War Is On With Obamabot Zombies • Private Property: Whats Next?

{sidebar id=2}
Does anyone believe that all of the things that are enumerated – and I’m talking about the actual enumerations of the Declaration of Independence.  Most people get hung up with the life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That was already there.  Locke had already written about that 150 years prior.  Most people that were colonists, hell, most English people had life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  It was the basis for English common law.  Jefferson, by his own admission, was not creating anything new.  He was stating that which was already, had already been stated.  He was just writing it down.  The meat-and-taters part of the Declaration of Independence is what does it declare.  It didn’t declare life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  It declared that the 13 colonies were and of right ought to be free and independent states.  That’s what it declared.

So a classic conservative then would want to defend the free and independent states.  Which is why classic conservatives after the ratification of the Constitution did what?  First order of business, 1791, was to do what?  Write the Bill of Rights.  Now, was this a positive statement of what you may do in your state or your community?  No, it was not.  Read the Preamble to the damn thing.  It is a limitation upon what the federal government may do to you.  It enumerated specifically things that the federal government,  Congress and its adjunct agencies, may never and may not do to you.  That’s what it enumerated.  One of those enumerations was the Tenth Amendment.  If you don’t have the enumerated power in Congress, well, then it’s left to the states and to the people respectively.  To me, a classical conservative would defend or conserve the Tenth Amendment.

Yet letters to the editor in the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation last week, when our good friend Mr. Chip, oh, wait, I’ve got a brain spasm here.  What is the gentleman’s name that got the Senate resolution passed in the state of Georgia asserting the Tenth Amendment?  Chip – it’ll come to me in a moment.  He was taken to task by an alleged “conservative” who said that he was out of his gourd.  Why, we’re going to have criminals running in the streets and roaming free if this is passed.  Of course he was – Chip Pearson.  He was – Senator Chip Pearson, the great Chip Pearson of Georgia (backgrounder on states’ rights transcript is here).  And Mr. Pearson corrected him in an editorial that he wrote to the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation and said, “Sir, conservatives defend the Constitution.  Citizens defend the Constitution, and they defend the Tenth Amendment here.  The state of Georgia will not allow lawbreakers to go free, sir.  Those that have already been incarcerated will remain incarcerated.  We’re talking about moving forward here.”

So answer – so let’s ask the question one more time here, and we’re 15 minutes into this discussion.  What are conservatives trying to conserve?  I have a short list here.  I call it Conservatism 7.6 (video on Conservatism 7.6 is here).  You may get the pun based on what?  Spirit of ‘76.  Here’s the six planks:  One, the Constitution does not live and adapt.  It doesn’t breathe.  It says what it says.  It means it.  It is not an expansive work.  It is finished business, finished law.  It was not meant to be twisted, maligned, and interpreted to mean this or that or the other.  It is an abject, false lie to say that you cannot define, quote, “original intent,” end quote.  Yes, you can.  And I can prove it to you, and I will prove it to you on September the 17th of this year when we release Part 3 of our trilogy, stories about the Founding Fathers, our radio movie.  This will put the coda, the end on the story, starting with the Declaration of Independence, covering the time in between the Declaration and the Constitution, and then Part 3, the Spirit of ‘76, covering the drafting and ratification of the  Constitution.  I can absolutely with certainty tell you what it originally meant.  All I’ve got to do is read the Ratification Debates.  I know what it meant.  I know what the men said.  I know what they voted on.  And I know why they voted on it.  This is part of the historical record.  It is a lie.  “You can’t know that, Mr. Church.  You don’t know what the First Amendment meant.”  Yes, I do.  I most certainly do.  And you can learn it, too.

Conservatism 7.6
Mike Church’s 6 Point Conservatism Checklist
I.  Now, pay attention to these things.  The Constitution does not live and adapt.  It is what it is, and it says what it says.  Get over it.

II.  Tax policy has got to be based on the moral grounds that it is wrong to steal from people.  That includes if you have a government IRS badge.  Stealing is stealing.  Can we all just agree on the moral principle that taxing is wrong.

III.  National defense and border enforcement are constitutional exercises of enumerated powers.  Matter of fact, if you go back and read the Federalist Papers, national defense is what the first 13 papers are all about.  This is how the Constitution was sold to the people back then.  So I think that conservatives can make the case that national defense is important.

IV.  Federal judges can only hear federal cases.  A federal judge can’t hear a case about the state of Georgia’s red-cockaded woodpecker.  Only a state of Georgia judge can hear the case.

V.  There is no act of tyranny passed by a Congress or a President that cannot be repealed.  That includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and any Environmental Protection Act.

VI. The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution means what it says and states we citizens must enforce it.  We are the keepers of what the Constitution is supposed to mean.

Part 2.  Tax policy must be based on the moral grounds that it is wrong to steal, even if you have a government badge to steal.  I’ve been talking about this for years.  Screaming and hollering with liberals and arguing over progressive taxation gets you where you are today.  It gets you nowhere. The Sixteenth Amendment needs to be repealed.  The income tax is immoral.  I believe it’s unconstitutional.  And it is not – you can’t – if you cannot go to your neighbor’s house and take something from him, if you owe – let’s say you, well, I want to put Little Johnny through school, and I’m two grand short.  So I’m just going to go knock on my neighbor’s door [knocking].  “Hey, hey, Bill, I need $2,000 for Johnny’s college tuition.  Why don’t you fork it over, pal?”  And the neighbor may say, “Screw you, George, I’m not giving you $2,000.”  Well, George may then pull a gun out, “Give me the money or else.”  Well, if he surrenders the money, he’s stealing it.  He’s getting it without your consent.  It’s immoral.  What’s the difference if the guy that’s at the door is in a suit and has an IRS badge?  What the hell is the difference?  It’s still immoral.  It’s still wrong.  And therefore the proper opposition to taxation is not on the rate.  I mean, this is a battle that I think many Republicans want to engage in because it keeps them in power. “ Why, I defend your tax rate.”  Why don’t you just defend me against the tax totally?  How about that?  That is opposition, ladies and gentlemen.

End Mike Church Show Transcript

Need MORE Tao of Dude-Mike Church Show transcripted brilliance? Then support this site and become a 24/7 BackStage Pass Subscriber and you can read them all! Recent Tao of Dude – The War Is On With Obamabot Zombies  Private Property: Whats Next?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Written by: TheKingDude

Rate it

Post comments (0)

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x