I would add that - in effect - we have no constitution today, at least one that is being paid attention to. Even as watered down as it is now with some pretty bad ill-advised amendments, if we followed it, we would be better off than what is happening now. The current flagrant ignoring of the basic separation of powers is just astounding.

I am really beginning to clearly see Leonard Peikoffs Ominous Parallels. The Demoblicans in Congress are on par with Hindenburg handing Hitler the Chancellorship. Next is a Reichstag Fire and then a Night of the Long Knives. And we'll have a bonafide dictator.

Any ballot should be invalid if it doesn't have a place to vote for "None of the above" and way to a vote of "no confidence" for any public official or organization.

I read in one of the documents at the Jefferson museum that at least one of the founding fathers knew that over time the constitution would be watered down and eventually would falter- but it was a good start anyway. Its turned into a socialist manifesto now where Obama thinks that what we all make pretty much belongs to him to distribute as he sees fit. Private property hardly exists now, particularly with the IRS powers, the DEA powers, and even city council powers if they want something you have.

While it is true that Jefferson's original draft of the Declaration of Independence said "Life, Liberty, and Property", it did get edited out. However, I believe that was because it was felt that the adoption of the Common Law covers that territory.

Much of the arguments around "errors" or "defects" in the founding documents revolves around the complaint that they were not clear enough. Another example is the removal of a sentence specifically laying out the Equal Footing Doctrine. That is where any new States admitted into the Union are on an Equal Footing with the original thirteen in all respects. They thought this was redundant and was already plenty evident in the structure and other clauses of the Constitution. Which it is. I think what they didn't expect was that there would be a general dumbing down process over the centuries. That would be probably be the most bewildering thing for them today.

You are saying that you prefer socialism.

"Quit voting for the progressives"
In most elections, this means voting for so-called "conservatives", who are even worse.

I find most of the statements on your site to be rather broad brushed and highly debatable as to whether they are sourced in actual errors or defects in the founding documents.

However, in general they capture the broad sentiment of what has happened overtime by deviating from the founding documents.

The one point that I find intriguing and worthy of further contemplation is that of having defined no means for a State to secede or a means by which the governed can replace the government when it has become destructive of those very purposes of good government. One could perhaps look at the intent of the Second Amendment, but like you say that was an add-on to the 1787 document by the States. I suspect the answer - and there will be those that don't like it - will be in the fact that they did not provide any means for the Congress or the States to control an Article V Convention once convened.

Those "greedy" you mention aren't the problem, as greed is merely desire. When that desire turns to Action, then it's properly called theft, extortion and beyond. Only "governments" are allowed to do such dastardly deeds - we people are not. Governments throw people in jail or kill them for crossing that line.

Right. All of us saw the Dem-Rep monopoly offer up only a motley pair of Statist / Collectivists to choose from, resulting in 98% of the voters crawling aboard that hayride. That shows what we're really up against.
Voting is not and never has been the answer. Perhaps if all ballots contained "none of the above, start over", along with an item to vote "Continue, or Dissolve" this (or any) government, real rational human beings might have a fighting chance. We know that could never happen, tho! Sob!

The stupid, Ignorant and gullible. .

'Tis every "nation" with a government which has failed. State-wide Socialism cannot exist without having some "government of force" make it "law".

The Great Experiment has almost failed as over the years socialism crept into the country, edging out capitalism until capitalism is no longer sustainable. As has happened time and time again, the more socialism, communism, fascism entered, the more freedom, diminished. Further results of government intrusion created a breakdown of the economy, manifesting itself in higher prices and fewer jobs. We have not yet reached the apex of the collectivist takeover, but we are getting close. When capitalism virtually disappears, we will begin the slide down into a 3rd world country. I don't think we are there yet, but we are close -- very close.

Our worshipped "founders" merely created yet another government of force -- therein lies the problem!

So please explain just how this "republic" made, or might have made, much real difference.

I touched on (at least some) those errors a good while back.
http://no-ruler.net/3460/failures-of-the...

I visited Jefferson's house a few months ago and it was great to see how the country was started. Between that visit and the series "The West" on Netflix, I could see how the constitution was not really some sort of Randian thing based on absolute morality. It was a compromise that let the settlers have "their" religion instead of the king's religion and cut out the taxes to England. But the mormons couldnt have their religion, and the US immediately set out to capture all the land over to the pacific ocean from anyone and everyone. Neither of those things were really justified under our "constitution"

I think the constitution didnt specifically protect property rights. They were into the "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness". But they didnt include "property". As a result, the political majority just slowly took away property rights one by one, and left us a society replete with cronyism where groups use government powers to take from other groups. Now, its ALL about who is connected and gets government power applied to their endeavors.

The tactic is working.
do multiple actions, "leak" inferred actions that you know you can`t do, just to inflame the average American - and remove attention from what you are doing.

Create an atmosphere of one crisis rapidly following the last to justify quick ( unread) fixes.

Introduce the narrative that the other side are extremists, then buttress with class warfare using the union organization, along with Sharpton & company to silence any opposition by squealing "racist!"

It works because the opposing party reveres their power over their character.

It works because a lot of folks get overwhelmed and just stay home. (2012)

Term limits solves the problem.
Until we demand our elected representatives write and pass solid legislation to limit their stay, it either will not change, or it will go real bad, real fast.

I am intrigued. What are those errors?

Quit voting for the progressives cg.

I don't think a lot of powers should be reserved to
the States. Look at slavery and segregation. I
think that the power to run his own life should be
explicitly reserved to the individual.(And NOT the
state government). As to who keeps electing these
people, it's pretty obvious that it is voters who
have no regard for individual rights, who are
basically no better than street thugs, who think
it is right to commit armed robbery on one's
neighbor so long as it is done by proxy and the
robbery is legalized. But John Galt in "At-
las Shrugged" said, "I saw that the enemy was
an inverted morality...." (that is, altruism).

very dumb people

Hello SaltyDog,
I vote "No Confidence."
"So who keeps electing these people?" The truly greedy... those who covet the property of others and enjoy the government redistribution.
Respectfully,
O.A.

"Your strengths are your weaknesses."

blarman's list of "greed, lust for power, and elitism" are just the 'weaknesses' of the 'strengths' of "enlightened self interest, independence, and self esteem". These qualities, both the positive values and their corresponding negatives, have nothing to do with democracy or the US Constitution or any other form of government per se, but are attributes of the human condition. What is relevant is that the designers of the Constitution took these tendencies into account and tried to design a system that could control them.

We have Gamed the system.

Jan

We had one, then...

We made voting a right for everyone not a privilege for the shareholders (Land Owners).

We made presidents get elected by popular vote rather than governor appointees to the electoral college.

We made Senators get elected by vote rather than appointed by the legislature.

We went from the President Answering to the Electorial College and indirectly the governors and thereby representing there needs. The Senate be appointed by the state legislators and thereby being interested in preserving the powers of the state. The House of Representatives being the democratic limb of the government that represented the people.

If to get a law through you had to meet the demands of the people, the restrictions of state legislators and the governors most of what has destroyed america would never have happened.

We had it, but we changed it to a Representative democracy in whole and as a result the whims of the "Useful Idiots" now rule.

The errors in the constitution which allowed for rampant crony capitalism have come home to roost. Now government is used to dole out favors and money to the "connected" people. So citizens vote for the people who will give them "goodies", and the democrats have done a good marketing job as the party that gives "goodies" out to the masses. This means our country is doomed to be internally defeated, unfortunately.