|
Why Restoring the Constitution is Not the Answer
by Joe McCarthy
8 April 2004
For many Americans, especially those on the right, the Constitution of the United States is a sacred document. The refrain you hear repeatedly among right-wingers, in their yearning for a bygone era, is that if we could only get back to the Constitution, everything would get right again. Strict Constitutionalism is as much an unshakeable dogma to many rightists as papal infallibility is to many Catholics. Just try suggesting that this might be bad ideology and you'll be met with bristling hostility and charges of heresy in many rightist circles. I, myself, used to be a believer in this line of thinking. I used to believe in the Constitution as a panacea.
Is this thinking sound? Is getting back to Constitutional government the magic bullet it's cracked up to be? I think not, and I hope to demonstrate WHY it is not.
I fully realize that a whole host of evils have been perpetrated against this nation through violations of the Constitution. The Federal Reserve Act, FDR's confiscation of gold, the 'PATRIOT ACT,' the new 'Homeland Security' Department and countless other crimes have befallen us as a result of treasonous politicians who have violated their oaths of office. But a closer review of the condition we are in reveals that several of our most severe problems were brought upon us in a completely Constitutional manner. Unlike the instances cited above, these evils were not foisted upon us by unconstitutional usurpations. Quite the contrary. They were ENABLED by the Constitution.
Consider:
The massive swarm of third-world immigration that has been wrecking our society came about as a result of the jew-instigated reform of 1965, which gutted our traditionally sound immigration policy. Was this act unconstitutional? Not at all. Under Art. 1 Sec. 8 Par. 4 of the Constitution, Congress has the perfectly legitimate power to make or alter the immigration and naturalization laws as it sees fit. There is no constitutional prohibition against allowing third-world immigrants in. A MAJOR downfall of the document.
Consider:
The Constitution has proven to be totally impotent in preventing the Jews and other subversives from forming powerful political pressure groups like the ADL, AIPAC, ACLU, etc. These groups, which are used like a battering ram against this nation, are not prohibited by the Constitution. Again, quite the contrary is true. Any move to outlaw or censor these groups would be unconstitutional under the First Amendment doctrine of freedom of speech and association.
Consider:
As anyone who has studied Jewish media power knows, the Jews gained their current stranglehold largely as a result of group pressure and selective buying of advertising by Jewish merchants. Newspapers and other media organs that kowtowed to the Jews got plenty of ad revenue, those that bucked the Jews were driven out of business. The end result was that these bankrupt news outlets were either bought up by Jews or ceased to exist altogether. Even those news outlets not under Jewish ownership are so dependent on Jewish ad revenue for survival that their editorial content, news reporting, etc., are largely constrained by Jewish likes and dislikes. And what can the Constitution do to remedy this fine mess you ask? Absolutely nothing! Under the doctrine of delegated powers, the Federal government has no power to decide who owns the media. The absolutely sane and necessary action of nationalizing or otherwise removing the Jewish grip on our news and entertainment media through government force would be blatantly unconstitutional.
I don't want to convey the impression that I'm opposed to the Constitution. I am not. All of its weaknesses considered, it is probably the finest document of its kind ever crafted. Still, we must come to grips with reality. The Constitution should not be restored. It has proven powerless to prevent an alien Jewish influence from hijacking and wrecking our society. Rather, we should look at the Constitution as something to build on. Something to use as a yardstick for the new Constitution that will be crafted after the next revolution.
Speaking of the Second American Revolution; we should realize that in such a revolution, any revolutionary force will have to violate the Constitution constantly in order to win. Before anyone reacts in knee-jerk fashion to that provocative statement, ponder these questions:
• Are we to abide by the Second Amendment and allow our enemies on the battlefield to keep their arms once we're in power?
• Are we to abide by the First Amendment and allow our enemies to organize and raise funds so as to enable them to gain strength against us to launch a counter-coup?
• Are we to allow the Jews to retain their chokehold on the media, thus allowing them to stir up the people against us through lies and propaganda?
• Are we to go to all the trouble of gaining power through revolutionary violence and then restore the vote so that the same brainwashed, Joe Lunchbucket lemmings who voted us into this mess in the first place, can vote us out and put the SAME traitors back in again?!
We can console ourselves in the fact that we won't be destroying the Constitution. It is already destroyed. Decades of treason against it has rendered it moot. We cannot destroy what was destroyed long ago. But we cannot get caught up in nostalgia for the Constitution. Like a dear friend it is dead and buried; murdered by the evil forces we seek to annihilate.
DEATH TO ZOG!! WHITE POWER!!
JOE McCARTHY
|