"DOES IT STILL MATTER"

The July 4th cover of Time Magazine references the Constitution and asks "Does It Still Matter. And now the truth is laid bare once again. The Left Wing Obama Sycophants at Time have shown their true stripes. They do not believe in our U. S. Constitution.

The Founding Fathers objective in putting together our Constitution was to protect the peoples' rights, keep central government small and limit government intrusion on the rights of the States or the Citizens. The Framers of the Constitution were guided by "natural law", which is the law that the Creator established for all men to govern themselves by.

No one says it better than Dr. Arnn, Hillsdale College. His comments are below. I think the question instead should be "Does Time Magazine Matter."

By Dr. Larry P. Arnn
President
Hillsdale College
The 4th of July cover article of Time magazine claims that the Constitution is irrelevant.

Frightening.

As proof of its irrelevance, Time lists a dozen products of modern society inconceivable to the framers, including antibiotics, "sexting," and Medicare. The Constitution's only virtue, they say, is that it has many meanings and thus leaves us able to do whatever we want to do.
But not everything has changed since 1787. When it comes to ordering society under the rule of law, what is most important? Knowledge of "collateralized debt obligations" or knowledge of human nature?

Here are a few things the framers did know something about: Religious Freedom. Education. Tyranny. Friendship. Happiness. Sovereignty of the People. Virtue.

The Constitution does not allow us to do whatever we want to do. In the words of James Madison, the Constitution was framed out of the belief that "it is the reason, alone, of the public, that ought to control and regulate the government. The passions ought to be controlled and regulated by the government."

The genius of the Constitution lies in its having a definite meaning on the fundamentals--that every individual has rights, that the people are sovereign, and that the governmental powers must remain separated--while leaving wide latitude to local government, or the people themselves, on issues not specifically addressed in the Constitution.

The framers were no gods; the amendment procedure was included for good reason. Yet for more than two centuries the United States has flourished in a project long thought impossible: self-government.

Liberty. Equality. Self-government.

If the Fourth of July is a celebration of these things, it is a celebration of the Constitution as much as the Declaration of Independence. No constitution in history has proven itself more deeply committed to these principles, and no nation has been more richly blessed in return.

The basic truth within the Constitution is that the government cannot have limitless power, for the simple reason that government is made up of people. A Constitution with no definite meaning gives free reign to the passions of those people within and without the government. A Constitution with a meaning honored and obeyed becomes a guardian of all people, for it sustains a government that is strong within its defined powers but limited in order to protect the liberty and equality of citizens.

Instead of scoffing at those Americans concerned that their federal government has overrun its limits in the name of energy and modernity, perhaps Time should consider what an American President said about the principles of the Declaration and the Constitution on the 150th anniversary of July 4th, 1776:

"It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers."
- Calvin Coolidge
July 5, 1926

Read the entirety of President Coolidge's "Speech on the Occasion of the One Hundred and Fiftieth Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

PROMINENT SURGEON CALLS OBAMACARE WHAT IT IS - A NIGHTMARE!!

Want to find out what Dr. David Janda, a prominent Ann Arbor, MI surgeon has to say about Obamacare? Dr. Janda has been on an education campaign in the Detroit area to let people know what Obamacare is REALLY going to do , and he spoke before a congressional committee on the subject. When he says Obamacare started with the stimulus bill he is right. There are many, many health care provisions laying-the-groundwork in the stimulus bill. But, Golly, I must have missed Obama mentioning that the stimulus bill contained health care creepy crawlies.

Watch the video TO THE END, and discover that if doctors don't "go along" with the rules and requirements of Obamacare starting 2013, they can be fined $100,000 and jailed. That's what he was told by the congressional committee. A Mighty Big Fine or The Big House.

This should chill you to the bone. It should also make you go to the polls on 11/2 and cast your vote AGAINST anybody currently representing us in Washington who voted for this unspeakable intrusion into our relationship with our health care providers. If they voted for it knowing what was in it, they have to GO! If they voted for it without reading it, they have to GO!

FIRE THEM, ALL OF THE YEA VOTES. If you don't fire them now they will be left in Washington to do more damage to our freedom and our Constitution. It's our last chance.

AND PLEASE PASS THIS ALONG TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW RIGHT NOW, BEFORE 11/2!

MULTILINGUAL VOTING CHAOS COMING SOON TO AN ELECTION NEAR YOU

Did you see it on TV today? There are communities in America who have referendum questions on their ballots that would allow non-residents to vote in municipal elections. Yea, that's right, crazy as it may sound, it's true.

The argument being made by the League of Young Voters is that people who are here legally but are not citizens should be able to vote on issues that affect their pocketbooks and their children. The politically correct position is "oh, my, they live here, they work here, their kids go to school here, so they should be able to vote here." The argument is that "this aligns with what the founders of this country believed, no taxation without representation."

After hearing about this I was left shaking my head, asking myself where in the world do American citizens get their civic education? "Taxation without representation" applies to non-citizens? Where in the Constitution or Bill of Rights does it say that?

Ideally voters should get educated about candidates and issues, but if you are not a citizen why would you care? Legal immigrants may be enticed to vote for policies regarding illegal immigration, more social programs, bilingual education in the schools, things that benefit only immigrants.

And the biggest issue? Without having gone through the becoming-a-citizen process, how do legal immigrants know anything about our Constitution, you know, little things like the 3 branches of government and how they are supposed to work together, and our legal and court system? They may lack sufficient knowledge about our political institutions and issues to cast an intelligent vote.

The question I have is why don't these people who want to have a voice in our government just become citizens? Well, the process can take 3-5 years, but the biggest reason they don't go through the citizenship process is because many of them CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH well enough to pass the citizenship test.

So I ask you, if legal immigrants are not able to speak our language, THAT IS ENGLISH IN CASE ANYONE HAS FORGOTTEN, then how are they supposed to be able to read a ballot? Oh, I forgot, they will probably be given ballots in their native language.

This is a big deal because there are millions of non-citizen immigrants living here. Yes, I know, the proposal right now is that they should have the right to vote on local issues. But therein lies the first step towards open voting for everyone. This is just another opportunity for rampant voter fraud and a total distortion of our electoral process.

Enough said.