The Constitution was written to set the rules of government in stone. It takes an entirely new tact on how to define a government. Instead of saying what the government is not allowed to do, it defines what the government is allowed to do.

Anything that the government hasn’t been given permission to do is reserved for The People or the States.

Many years ago, I owned an ISP. Back when dial up was king. When my partner and I were discussing the terms and conditions, he wanted to make this long list of things that were not allowed. I went the other direction.

“Be good. If you are not good, your account will be terminated. You will be charged for any mess that you leave us to clean up. Cleaning up after spam starts at $2000.”

There was something in there about us being the last judge of what is “good”.

We didn’t have problems with our clients. They got it.

If we had created a list of, then if somebody found Y that they did and we would not like it. They would simply say, You didn’t say we could not do Y, and we would be out of luck.

Our Constitution works the same way. The government was given a limited set of things they were allowed to do. In addition, the founders added a set of “Hell NO!” clauses because they knew the state couldn’t be trusted. That is the Bill of Rights.

Our Constitution is a remarkable document. It created an astonishing country, one I’m proud to be a citizen of.

Of course, when the left loses, they cry. They claim that it isn’t fair, that it isn’t right, that you cheated. If none of that works, they then go to that old standby, changing the rules.

Trump got three justices confirmed to the Supreme court. That was because the Senate stopped filibusters on Supreme Court appointments. That was possible because the Obama Senate stopped filibusters for appointments below the Supreme Court. They were warned, but they did it. A few years later it bit them, and we have Bruen.

Facing a largely ineffective Congress, an overstepping Supreme Court, the rising threat of authoritarianism, and a government seemingly unable to address many of our most pressing problems, a small but growing number of liberal scholars and commentators have been making a strong case against a previously sacred cow: the U.S. Constitution.
Ross Rosenfeld, The Case Against the Constitution, Newsweek, (last visited Aug. 3, 2023)

Well, isn’t that a kicker. The Constitution seems to be getting in the way of their goals. Maybe because their goals suck.

Among the biggest issues they cite are the amendment process (which makes changes virtually impossible), excessive veto points, the Electoral College, lifetime appointments for Supreme Court justices, a first-past-the-post (winner-take-all) electoral system (rather than, say, proportional representation), and a grossly disproportionate Senate that ensures greater power for the mostly white, more rural small states at the expense of larger ones.

If you look at California’s constitution, you will find a document with 514 amendments. That is quicksand compared to the granite under the Constitution of the United States.

Everything he is complaining about are the things that keep the wolves from voting to have lamb for dinner.

And “RACISM!” is there too.

When you look at election maps, and you see blue states, then look at the county maps and find that most blue states are mostly red by area, with a few very dense blue cities. Those blue cities use gerrymandering to maintain control of the state.

“There’s not just one way to do democracy, but the way we’re doing it now is bizarre,” he told Newsweek, “because it allows people to win victories in the presidency or control the Senate, the House, and state legislatures without actually getting the most votes.”

Yet, the Constitution acts as an impediment to any serious change.

That’s because we are not a democracy. We are a representative republic. The mob doesn’t rule.

“The simplest way to put it is the Constitution was written in 1787, and the framers designed a government for a tiny, primitive, agrarian nation of some 4 million people,” he said. “And they designed a government for their times; not for our times. Government wasn’t expected to do very much back then and they designed a government that couldn’t do very much.”

There it is, they want the government to do more. He has no understanding of living without the heavy hand of the government controlling him. More important to him is that the government will control you and me.

“Our devotion to the framers and to the Constitution [is] a strange custom that if you discovered it in a foreign tribe, you would come back and say ‘This is really odd.'” He added, “The national Constitution is treated really as a sacred book and to talk about amendments is almost blasphemous.”
It’s possible that we’re beginning to see somewhat of a change in public opinion—in part, perhaps, because of the willingness of some to dive into these previously toxic waters, and perhaps because the threats to democracy suddenly seem so very real.

The threat to democracy might seem real, that’s because what this entire article is about is the left not getting their way.


Ross Rosenfeld, The Case Against the Constitution, Newsweek, (last visited Aug. 3, 2023)
Spread the love

By awa

6 thoughts on “When they lose, they attempt to change the rules”
  1. Democracy is a word that makes my skin crawl. Stupid people claim this is a democracy…. Like obammy claiming the Constitution is full of “negative rights” because it tells gubmint what it can’t do….
    All the while he took full advantage of those rights to make himself rich… fuk them. liberals will never learn..

  2. Standard Democrat tactic. After Reconstruction they rewrote state constituions to prevent blacks — who were mostly Republicans at the time — from voting and being elected. They ginned up false charges to slander black office holders. They committed vote fraud en masse and then used the false charges as leverage to get agreement on pardoning the people found guilty of vote fraud.
    Hell, they even made it illegal for the Secret Service to investigate anything but Treasury-related crimes because the Secret Service had been effective in taking apart the Klan.

  3. “the rising threat of authoritarianism” This is true but I highly doubt he gets the irony of where the ‘authoritarianism’ is coming from compared to all his other claims.

  4. Tyrannical Power cannot exist without a majority democratic mob-rule citizenry as its enforcer. The founders understood this and put into law the necessary obstructions to accomplish what amounts to incivility, which is exactly what Mob Rule is. A ‘Democratic People’ are never civil…. except when under a tyrannical boot, imposing excessive cruel, inhuman consequences. Fear then produces the tyrant’s goal of more power and the more people enslaved to democracy; the more power will become available.
    The US Constitution in my opinion is best described as a Stranglehold Mechanism, designed to bring into subjection tyrannical endeavors. Giving earned power to political coalitions as determined and created by The Citizenry (The People) originating from Main Street, then delivered to the people’s county government, who is instructed to deliver the product to the state government. A natural bottom-up system of civility is established, which uses the ‘A Democratic System’ ONLY to enable and collect voter’s votes. The Democratic Votes are then processed-vetted only by the governmental constructs put in place by the people, starting from the local voting precincts, and upward to county and then state democratic controls, all achieved by the political party coalitions.
    The Electoral College System is the Stranglehold Mechanism which allows only enough air for the system to barely breath. The system ensures that ONLY counting of votes takes place and nothing else. Votes are vetted from the bottom up, i.e., from every voter’s voting precinct and upward to the State Elector Representative System which participates under the state’s political parties and their election policies within the constructs of the Electoral College System.
    Today, a Mail-In Voting Mechanism acts as a virus within the Electoral College System. Votes bypass the vetting process, the party coalition policies, because of laws from the federal level which enable a laxed vetting process which can neither be judged as validated nor invalidated, in any court of law. There is no legal way to disprove or prove if the vote is legally valid in time to influence an election either way. All attempts to do so result in an “Inconclusive Result”, and thus not admissible as evidence either way in a legal proceeding. The default state of a Mail-In Vote is, True, until a lengthy legal process which favors the default state. By the time a vote is determined by be fraudulent, the vote outcome has already been certified and judged final.
    Ron DeSantis in the state of Florida has taken steps, passed laws, to counter the mail-in voting process’ ‘open borders policies’ which enable fraud at unprecedented levels—–everyone gets in with a wink and a nod. For the Electoral College to survive the states need to protect it and right now,
    The new effort to circumvent the Electoral College System attempts to influence state to pass laws which allow the Electors in the state to give the National Popular Vote Winner all the state’s electors—the exact opposite of what the Electoral College System was created to achieve. Today three states determine who gets the 270 Electoral College Votes required to win the presidency, Arizona, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. If the Democrat Leftist win in any of those three states, they’ll have the presidency. Check out this website, it spells it out plainly –
    Changing the Rules is an effort which is about to succeed and will remain triumphant. That is unless the Republican Party gets into the Mob-Rule act and challenges the Leftist Tyrants for supremacy. The People will then become…..Slaves to the winner.

  5. Leftists are no different than children, toddlers actually. Yes, they have adult sized bodies, and they may have an adult level vocabulary, but they think and act like five year olds.
    “Our Constitution is a remarkable document.”
    It is more than just remarkable, it is unique. In all of human history, no country has been founded on the tenant that Government power belongs to the populace. No other country was founded on the basis of “government is a necessary evil that must be restricted.”
    Which, of course, rubs some people the wrong way. Why? Because people tend to want control. They want to be in charge, and they do not want to be challenged. Why does everyone want to be king for a day? Human nature.
    And, leftists, being the kindergarteners they are, want to be in charge. Because they have a toddler level of thinking, and are absolutely convinced they are right, and they deserve to be in charge because everyone else is not as smart as they are.
    But… that damned US Constitution does not allow them unfettered powers without question. Therefore, it must be changed because… well… leftists are much smarter than you are, and they should be in charge.
    Instead of accepting reality like an adult, they will take their ball and go home, or overturn the board.

Comments are closed.