Bob Owens

The saddest truth in politics is that people get the leaders they deserve

Bloomberg wants to reintepret the Constitution

Written By: Bob - Apr• 23•13

There is a special sort of sickness that infects those souls who come into money, power, or fame, that gives them the illusion that they are somehow better than the population at large, and that because of their extraordinary individual circumstance or fortune, they are then “experts” who may dictate to the masses what their God-given rights are, and how their lives are to be conducted.

Mike Bloomberg is one of these arrogant souls:

In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday the country’s interpretation of the Constitution will “have to change” to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks.

“The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry,” Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. “But we live in a complex word where you’re going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change.”

What Bl0omberg—and indeed many self-styled elitists—don’t grasp, is the simple fact that the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights aren’t just a bunch of  malleable words on parchment that can be twisted, warped, and stretched to fit the chosen agenda of today’s arrogant power brokers. The ideas behind those words give them context and substance, and we’re very fortunate to know precisely what the Founders meant because of the letters they shared among each other and to friends, in their speeches and contemporary op-eds that they published in Colonial newspapers, in the texts that they cited, and in the educations provided by the philosophers they respected.

Collectively, these founding documents are not mere collections of words, but the fixing (in a scientific, curational sense) of the ideas and philosophies that are the essence of the Revolution, a revolution in the hearts and minds of Americans that was never supposed to end, where every sacred liberty is jealousy guarded against a federal government that they wanted to have a minimal impact on the rights of the people. The Constitution and Bill of Rights do not tell us what we as citizens can do. On the contrary, they exist as restraining orders telling the government what it cannot do.

Elitists such as Bloomberg have been chipping away that that restraining order for more that 200 years, attempting to undermine it, corrupt it, and they clearly mean to discard it entirely, so that they can dictate to you what you may do/drink/eat/own/say/think.

They are pushing hard, and indeed, have managed to split the Republic into two radically different peoples within the borders of our nation within the past 60 years. The basic philosophies championing individual rights and civic duty cherished by my people are those ideas and ideals shared by the Founding Fathers. The philosophy of dictatorial control of the government over the people and every meaningful aspect of their lives is what Bloomberg and his allies are fighting for with all their might and power.

These philosophies cannot coexist beside one another, and one side or the other must triumph in a contest that is a force of will over the direction of this nation.

Chose your side, and determine for whom you will make your stand.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

10 Comments

  1. david7134 says:

    Now you see that we had the same issues before 1860. It was only with the win by the north that the only emerging issue was slavery. Despite the fact that Lincoln started the war and he did not list slavery as the reason. But the same forces were present. As a consequence of the win by the north, we lost independent government and personal liberty. We are supposed to be consolidated by the fact that the slave were freed. Well, the slave were not freed as the north continued to have them for some years later. Imagine, a slave nation fighting another slave nation to free the slaves. But, back to the present day, there is only one way that our divide is going to be resolved.

    • Casey says:

      …except that Lincoln and the North were fighting on the side of increased Federal power, whilst the Southrons were defending State (and by extension, individual) rights.

  2. Comrade X says:

    “To disarm the people… was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” George Mason

    Death before slavery!

  3. rumcrook™ says:

    we have become a “game preserve park for infidel hunts” and sheep sheering by our elites.

    http://rumcrook.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/we-have-become-a-game-preserve-park-for-infidel-hunts/

  4. AZOlddog says:

    I do fear that CW2 is coming. But, as has been said if it has to happen let it happen in my time that my Grandchildren will not have to!

    • I worry that a second Civil War (should we not be able to settle things politically) would not be able to conclude with an armed truce similar to the situation on the Korean Peninsula because of demographics and geography. The “other side” controls two of our three coasts, effectively isolating us in flyover country. It would have to be a full-blown revolution and fresh start, which will be a much longer and bloodier fight.

  5. Frank Hall says:

    All I can say to Bloomberg concerning giving up Constitutional Rights is “You first, Mike.” If you’re not ready to give up your armed guards and ability to spout your nonsense in a free press first, then shut up.

  6. TMR says:

    Reason seems to dictate that the scumbags had guns, despite the omnipotent Massachusetts gun laws, prove that gun control does NOT work. Keep passing laws and criminals will continue to break them.

    You can’t even touch a pistol at a gun store in MA unless you show a Mass conceal carry permit. And the bad guys still got guns…

  7. louielouie says:

    my apology to bob as this is going to be an off topic comment.
    it seems to me that what bloomberg is doing is redefining.
    of late, i have read how hussein has got his people working on re-defining the GDP. this is being done so they can announce how much the GDP has increased under shit for brains. that is not name calling, that is simple statement of fact.
    what i think hussein’s people should do is include a portion of mexico’s economy in the US economy. immigrants send so much money south of the border to spend there, that portion should count for us as well. accordingly, mexico crime statistics should be included as well. this way, fast and furious, will look just like another family reunion.
    this has been an off topic comment by LL.

  8. Joe Doakes says:

    I wonder how the population density of London in 1776 compares to Boston today? How the crime rate compares? Do we really have a more complex police problem?