How Much Of The Constitution Should They Have Read?

The US Constitution is a contract between the government and those governed. It delineates the powers that We the People allow our government to have. It is the law of the land and it is unique in the history of the world.

The House of Representatives opened with a reading of the US Constitution. The Republicans chose to have read the current document leaving out the items that had been changed. This upset liberals and among them was Jesse Jackson, Jr. who believes that reading the current, amended Constitution, glossed over history, particularly the part that dealt with slavery.

While the Constitution does not mention slavery (in the original document) there is no doubt it was addressed. Article 1, Section 2 discusses representation and how people are counted. In it, there is the three-fifths clause. The document says that the number of people will be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons.

Notice that it does not say slaves but there is no doubt, and history supports the fact, that the three-fifths applied to them. This part was changed by Section 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment.

According to Jackson, not reading this clause shows that the Republicans glossed over the racist part of the document where slaves were only considered to be three-fifths of a human.

Of course the clause does not make slaves three-fifths of a person. It was a method to count the census and determine how Representatives would be apportioned. It was made this way as a method to end slavery and not to mark slaves as less than a full human.

Slave owners wanted all slaves counted so that they would have greater representation in Congress. If all the slaves were counted, the southern slave owners would have many more members in the House and any efforts to end slavery would have been defeated based on the numbers. By reducing the population, the Founders were able to reduce the number of Representatives from the slave states. This was a balance between those who wanted no slaves counted (because they could not vote) and those who wanted all of them counted so they would have greater numbers of Representatives.

It is important to note that the three-fifths number is from an earlier attempt to organize when the Articles of Confederation were being revised. The slave owners did not want any of their slaves counted when it came to taxing because they would have had to pay more taxes. At that time the three-fifths rule was a compromise agreed upon though the measure eventually failed.

When it came time to compromise on the population used to determine representation, the three-fifths rule was a method that had previously been agreed to so it was inserted to gain passage of the Constitution and to limit the number of Representatives from slave owning states.

Glenn Beck has mentioned that our Constitution is a great document because the Founders gave us a way to change or add to it. This allows us to correct injustices and to add things necessary to run our country. The beauty is that we leave the changed parts in the document so that anyone reading it at anytime can see what we did and how we changed. The three-fifths clause changed because of the Fourteenth Amendment just like the Twenty-First Amendment changed the Eighteenth. The beauty is that both of the changed parts remain but are superseded by newer parts.

Beck thinks that the entire document should have been read to show our scars and how we advanced. Jackson thinks we should have read it in its entirety as well though his reason is to show the racist part of the Constitution. The reality though, is that Jackson is incorrect because Article 1, Section 2 was not racist. It was merely a method to count people or representation and to limit the power of slave owners. If he took the time to learn he would see that this was a brilliant move to eventually end slavery.

I do not disagree with Beck or Jackson about reading the entire thing if the purpose of the exercise was an educational one. Then each section could be read and people could see why we did what we did and how it was changed.

But the reading in the House was designed to present the document in its current form, the form in which we must apply it. The Republicans were simply reading the rules as they now apply.

The Founders wanted to end slavery and they worked on that. Yes, it is true some of them were slave owners but about 70% of those who signed the Declaration of Independence were not slave owners and most of our Founders released their slaves.

George Washington’s will freed his slaves upon the death of his wife, Martha, and provided for the care and education of their children until the age of 25 out of funds from his estate.

As an educational tool the Constitution should be read in its entirety so that people can understand our history.

But for the exercise that took place in the House the only parts that needed to be read are those that currently apply because it is those to which we will hold our members of Congress accountable.

UPDATE: The usual suspects are upset. Seems they want to take the country back to slavery.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Don’t Play Politics With Tragedy, When Its A Lefty

A gunman entered the Discovery Channel building in Maryland and held people hostage for a while. Fortunately the police took the guy out and no one else was hurt. I am thankful that no one was hurt and pray for those affected.

The wacko who did this is obviously mentally ill and he made demands that demonstrated that he was deeply disturbed. He wanted Discovery to run programming telling people to stop having their parasite babies and all kinds of other way out stuff including programming that discussed global warming and how we are hurting the planet. Worried that people might start saying someone like Al Gore must have riled this guy up and caused him to kill, the cheerleaders for the left over at Media Matters Tweeted this:

Discovery Channel hostage-taker is the perpetrator of a crime-not liberal, conservative or a chance to score points

It is understandable that the left’s mouthpieces would make such a statement. You see, they are ALWAYS making these kinds of claims. If someone asks “are you a Muslim” and then assaults the person, well Glenn Beck had to have incited the guy. If some guy flies a plane into the IRS building or an illegal gets the snot beat out of him or a shooter takes out someone the rant from the left is that People like Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Palin and many others are the ones who caused it by putting ideas in the heads of crazy people.

When the shoe is on the other foot the excuses start to fly. To be certain, those of us on the right have always maintained that crazy people carried out the bad acts and that no talk show host had anything to do with the violence.

But the left does not buy it as people like Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz scream about the loudmouth right wing hate mongers who incite violence and they refuse to accept that some people are wackos and do bad things. Of course, these folks barely have an audience but still…

Now that a person who was spouting what was clearly leftist doctrine caused the problems we get a tweet telling us is it a crazy person and we should not be using the events for political gain. I am sure that Olbermann will lead with this and will point out how the left incited the guy.

Or will he try to pass it off as inspired by the right?

I will not blame it on anyone other than the guy who did it. He is at fault and he is responsible. Finally, Media Matters agrees with me. But you can bet they will not feel that way the next time some wacko does something while spouting off his conservative views…

Because Media Matters does not give credence to violence being incited by any person or group:

To combat all of those pesky accusations that the right-wing media has been inciting the fringe to violence, Beck made sure to add this jewel into his monologue: Charleston City Paper

Notice that MM does not say the rumors are false or unfounded. No, it mocks the idea that they are false by calling them pesky. In other words, MM is giving credence to the idea that the right (and Beck in particular) incites violence.

But, but, but, it is just some crazy guy is what we get when there is a hint that a lefty did something bad.

And this my friends is why Media Matters does NOT Matter. It is a left wing rag that fabricates things to advance the progressive Socialist agenda. It is a shill for the Democrat party and it works hard to protect Democrats. It is not to be trusted.

They got it right today but not because they intended to. They got it right protecting their precious Democrats.

Let us keep their Tweet in mind and see how they respond the next time some supposed right winger commits an act of violence.

I am taking bets that MM will blame it on conservative talk…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Public Education At The Sharpton Rally

Amercan Dream

Al Sharpton is still smarting from the humiliation he suffered this weekend. This racist pathological liar smeared Glenn Beck and the people who attended the Restoring Honor Rally as a bunch of racists.

The Sharpton morons had a picture of MLK and Glenn Beck with the word Dream pointing at MLK and the word Nightmare pointing at Beck. The nightmare was the for Sharpton who had to realize his mojo is no longer any good. Sharpton is decidedly bitter because of his inability to rally the troops while Beck gathered over half a million people to the mall, people who were peaceful and non violent. There were probably more people of color at the Restoring Honor Rally than at the Sharpton take back the dream rally (or whatever this moron called it).

Sharpton was supported by a mostly black crowd and labor union members who carried signs like the one pictured in this post. Take a look at it and see if you can find the problem.

These folks are a product of the public school system. I have no doubt that there were plenty of people at the Beck event who can’t spell but I bet they would have checked the work before taking it out in public.

Then again, maybe this is not so surprising. After all, it is union work…

Cave Canem
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

How Many People At The Rally And Were They Racists?

Moron's Sign
Moron Liberal’s Sign

The usual post rally numbers game is underway and people are saying that as few as 87,000 and as many as 1 million people attended the Restoring Honor event in DC. The liberal left needs to minimize the numbers because the bigger the numbers are the weaker its position becomes.

I was at the rally and I believe there were closer to a million people than to 87,000. The New Carrollton Metro station had 8000 to 10,000 people in line when I arrived. It took nearly 2 hours to get to the train and when I did get on the train the line down below was longer than when I arrived. The entire Mall was surrounded by people and the crowd extended to the Washington Monument. The open area to the left (when looking at the Lincoln Memorial) was completely full of people and the right had densely packed groups way into the wood line (they cannot be seen from the overhead shots but they were there and they were packed in there).

The crowd was mostly white (as is the population of this country) but there were quite a few people of color in attendance. I saw many, many people who were not white and they appeared to be enjoying themselves. In fact, two women of color were walking next to me on the way to the Mall and one looked to the other and said; “Can you believe he asked me where the Al Sharpton event was? I told him over there where those 10 people are. I am going down here where everyone else is.” She was amused that the person would assume that since she was not white she would be on her way to see Sharpton rather than Beck. She got a huge laugh out of it as did everyone with whom she shared the story.

I understand that the left is upset by all the attention non liberal groups get and it needs to fight it any way it can. This is why everything is labeled racist. But minimizing the crowd at this event and repeating the same tired lines about it being very white is getting old. Whites are a majority of the population and when one considers that 95% of blacks are held captive on the Democrat plantation then it is easy to see why throngs of blacks are not at these types of events. However, rejecting the validity of an event because it has too many people of one color and not enough of another makes no sense and is very dangerous. Those who think that any rally that consists of mostly white people is not valid would have to invalidate the Al Sharpton rally that consisted mostly of black people.

Additionally, this picture of the Martin Luther King “I have a dream” speech shows the crowd to be almost all black. No whites are found in the picture of the crowd. I am sure some were there but since whites made up 60%-70% of the population (probably more like 80% back then) at that time then this crowd is disproportionately black. I find that perfectly acceptable but if we are going to use the diversity of color at an event to give it credibility or validity then MLK’s speech was not credible and not valid. I would also point out that Obama’s inauguration had huge numbers of blacks in the crowd, numbers that were hugely disproportionate to their representation in the country. Does this mean that event lacked validity?

There are plenty of pictures of the crowd and they tell a story that makes it clear more than 87,000 people were there. MLK had 200,000 to 250,000 at his speech and the Restoring Honor pictures show more people than attended King’s speech so it is logical to assume that there were more than 200,000 people there. I think that the number is 600,000 to 1 million but have no way of knowing and no agency does any official counting.

It would be interesting to know how many Metro tickets were sold. That would give a good indication of how many people were there.

Suffice it to say that the event is not well received by liberals who cannot grasp the concept of honor and who cannot see anything but racism in such events. It will drive them nuts for some time to come.

I also add that there were many people opposed to Beck having this rally in the same place where MLK had his speech and on the same date that the speech occurred. Al Sharpton was very upset about this claiming that Beck was against what MLK stood for (which Sharpton erroneously believes to be the removal of state’s rights) and challenged Beck to debate the Ground Zero Mosque issue, which Sharpton supports. This challenge came as Sharpton appeared on Geraldo Rivera’s show. So does anyone else find it ironic that Sharpton complains about the location of Beck’s rally but dismisses this concern (location) from people opposed to the mosque? Thanks to Rick for this insight.

Anyone want to wager that the people offended at Glen Beck’s choice of location for his Restoring Honor rally in DC (where Martin Luther King held his I Have A Dream speech) are the same people defending the location of the mosque at Ground Zero?

Anyone?

We will hear more in the days ahead…

Here are some great pictures and interesting takes on the rally:
Affirmative Action Counting for DC Events
Leftists Could Find No Racism at Restoring Honor Rally
Wrap Up and Whitewash (Plus, who is cleaner and where is the racism)
An enormous and impassioned crowd (and from the New York Times no less)
Washington Compost (the added “mostly black” to the Sharpton crowd report later, probably in response to a comment asking why it was not reported the same way as the RH Rally)
CNN article Note how many comments refer to the WHITE crowd
Why is there this assumption that MLK and his speech were a black only thing?

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]

Who Are The New Black Panthers?

The New Black Panther Party has been in the news lately for a few things that have happened since the 2008 election. On election day two NBPP members, dressed in military style clothing, wielded a baton at a polling place in Philadelphia and intimidated voters. Despite what they or their apologists claim, they intimidated voters. It was all caught on video and it is obvious to even the most dense among us.

The Obama Justice Department dropped the case and got an injunction against the baton wielding moron. He is not allowed to be a polling place until 2012, just in time to intimidate people when Obama runs for reelection.

The same moron was caught on video saying that the blacks needed to kill some crackers and their babies in order to get racial equality. Just imagine what kind of outrage there would be if a KKK member had said the same things about black people.

And yet, the state run media is generally silent on the issue.

The NBPP is a small group of militant black men who think society has done them wrong and that they have to fight against the injustice of white America. They demand reparations for slavery and I agree with this. I believe we should pay reparations to any person who was held as a slave in this country. If you can find a former slave then pay him. Otherwise, shut up. The descendants of slaves deserve no such thing.

Hell, the descendants are better off than if their ancestors had remained in Africa. I am in no way condoning slavery. I think that slavery was a horrible institution in this country. It is immoral and wrong. But it happened nonetheless. The people who are here now that are descendants of slaves have better opportunities than if they had been born in Africa. Otherwise they would go back there.

No, the NBPP is content to stir up racial turmoil based on perceived injustice. The leader, Malik Shabazz, is an accomplished lawyer but it appears as if the rest of them are a bunch of deadbeats who have never held a real job. They are content sitting around stirring up trouble and blaming whitey for all their problems.

The reality is they are a bunch of cowards who have an inferiority complex and a genuine jealousy of white people. They are true racists who want to kill the crackers and their babies.

The problem is that Eric Holder has given them a pass on their intimidation so look for more of it in the future.

If you encounter any of these thugs at the polls just stomp their guts out because no matter what they do, they will get a pass.

The NBPP has made veiled threats against Glenn Beck and has vowed to show up in DC on 8/28 when Beck talks at the Lincoln Memorial. I think I might just show up for that little show and I am sure thousands of other patriots will show up as well. Let’s see how these cowards act then.

I bet they wet their pants like all cowards with a small penis complex.

Geraldo takes Shabazz to task

Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog

Gunline

[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]