Translate

Tuesday, January 1, 2013




First Resolutions for 2013Get Rid of Arcane Political System and Rewrite the Archaic Constitution—Source of Our Political Dysfunction!!
Let’s get real!! Our Political System is BROKEN!!
  No argument here! Congress has been the least productive body since 1947 and POTUS has bequeathed these indolent,  prevaricators an increase in salary
  So incompetence is rewarded in our completely dysfunctional political system. 
  And what of the self-designated ELITE SENATE—useless, think tank. Lazy, incompetent—Believe me!  
  I have treated some of our illustrious SENATORS and even I was shocked by how little they accomplish and how inured they are to our  daily existence. 
  Only these parasites who feed in the trough of insolence, incompetence and SOCIOPATHY [how else can you become a professional life long liar?] can justify their existence. 
Translated that means only society's PARASITES —Washington Think Tanks, Lobbyists, Military Industrial Wastrels, The “Coco-Pops” Media  and those sinecures called bureaucrats believe in the inevitability of our political system.  To those who live outside the beltway there is a real, increasing sense that  the Washington Experiment of Government has long ago expired,  many times over. 
  Lest you think me a nihilist, then think again.  I am a true son of liberty and entrepreneurship
  In that vein,  I believe in the deepest part of my soul and intellect that the political system has to be abolished in the same way that the arcane document called the CONSTITUTION has become the very source of our collective discomfort. 
  In fact,  a recent article in the NY TIMES [ Not exactly a Libertarian Paper!]  by Louis Seidman, a professor  of Constitutional Law at Georgetown University, has reinforced what I have believed for eons. 
  He articulates in a far more brilliant way than I that the Constitution as we, the people, know it is completely outdated and ‘down right evil..’. 
  Let me expand on my beliefs about this arcane piece of paper. 
The Constitution was written over 225 years ago by a group of white, progressive, land rich male patricians who did not even follow their own edicts within the very agreement they had made. 
  In fact, we must remember, that collectively we were born out of terrorism and our founding fathers were so called terrorists. 
What that means is that our own founding fathers could not agree on a piece of paper that did not suite their respective needs.
John Adams enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts which violated the First Amendment  guaranteeing freedom of speech.  Thomas Jefferson [my favorite] insisted that every constitution should expire after a single generation.  In fact,  he admitted shamelessly that his most famous act as POTUS  (the Purchase of the Louisiana Territories from Napoleon Bonaparte) far exceeded his constitutional powers
  Senators were given disproportionate powers because of the disparity in state sizes.  Right now, the least populated states of Idaho, Nevada and Montana have more power than California, Texas and New York combined due to seniority rules/appointments.
And congress has become populated according to rules and dictats that have no relevance to national governance other than to the fact that congress multiplies like cockroaches for no other reason than they can.  Re-districting and gerrymandering have become the shibboleths of the day without any meaning or gravitas.  Just simply a mantra to which we became beholden.
Lincoln [my least favorite POTUS or film of the year] issued the Emancipation Proclamation 150 years ago as a justification for military action that allowed our country to slaughter close to one million of it’s own people.   He justified the elimination of Habeas corpus, the elimination of freedom of the press and dissent by the proclamation that he had the inherent powers as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Services.  But everyone, including himself,  knew and conceded that the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LACKED THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER to dissolve slavery where it already existed. 
Moreover, when the reality caught up with the illegal usurpation of power,  the 13th Amendment ratification was achieved in a manner that was totally antithetical to the provisions of the constitution. 
  So was John Wilkes Booth wrong when he uttered the words, “Sic Semper tyrannis!”  Thus always with tyrants!
Furthermore, to complicate the constitutional quagmire even further,  the reconstructed legislatures of the defeated Southern States  provided the crucial votes to ratify the 13 amendment!
  So what was the Civil War all about? 
  The industrial north devouring and reconfiguring the agrarian south with their most important access to waterways like the Mississippi River,  the Port of New Orleans, and let’s not forget the transcontinental railroad—east to west and north to south.
  Again economics dictated the demands of an imperial nation. 
  I have no qualms with that explanation.  And I am not for slavery but that was an issue that Lincoln never really cared about, only as it proved useful for his military rationalizations and historical destiny.   Remember, he was basically a lawyer for the major railroad companies.
Then in 1937,  FDR expounded extensively on his devotion to the political constraints of the constitution while threatening the Supreme Court as it stood in it’s way of expanding his New Deal and expanding Federal power. 
  Again in 1954 , when Justice Robert H. Jackson  decided on  Brown vs Board of Education, he conceded that his decision had nothing to do with  the constitution but with moral and political necessity
But back to the basic point that our constitution is no longer viable and has become the source of the political impasse and not the solution , so what do we do now? 
Riot? No! 
Start another Civil War? No!
It’s time for WE, The People Of The United States, to convene together another conference –virtual or not—to consider rewriting the constitution so that we no longer have disproportionate power in the senate and log jams in the house. 
  We live in a 21st century world which our founding fathers could never imagined with all the amazing changes that have transpired in the past 225 years. 
  So an antiquated document which is really no longer relevant can be interpreted, reactivated and rationalized as a ‘living, growing document’ when in fact it is moribund and contributing to the serious malfeasance that we call the American Political System. 
  In fact , as I had said previously , we were born of revolution so let it be that through revolutionary ideas and attitudes can we maintain a vibrant Republic that one day-- given that formidable outreach and penetration of the  internet-- that we might become truly A DEMOCRACY where no President or legislators is around to tell us one more lie that will cost us in time, money and most dearly in human bodies
  America is not a static concept.   It is a vibrant experiment in which we must start again and tear up old documents and rethink our governance just like our founding fathers had done. 
  And maybe one day, decades from now, we can thank our Rejuvenating (republican) Mothers for having reconstructed our ossified,  petrified politics and it’s moribund associates –the politicians. 
  Ours is a time of meritocracy and technology.  Let’s combine them and see what happens.  Let's get rid of the self serving politicians and elect true representatives of their constituents.  Contribute to and encourage honest leaders to run for office.
  To a new free experimental NEW YEAR!!!
Let me recall the words of the great Roman Statesman Seneca: "Exigua pars est vitae quam now vivimus!"
The Part of Life We Really Live Is Short!! But we must live a decent country to our children and grandchildren.
So enjoy it, my fellow, American patriots!!!  Question and Challenge corrupt authority in the best way you know how.
Let’s experiment constructively in this new time and new year!!! 



46 comments:

  1. I read the NYT article and found it to be rather intriguing. I just finished your blog post and honestly I can't say I don't see the argument as a valid one. I was always raised as American as Apple Pie when it came to our countries traditions and history. I'm a descendent of General Nathanael Greene and I always took great pride in the founding of our country and the fight for our freedom from a monarchy such as Britain. Whats interesting is I never took the time before to ask the question of is this tradition and allegiance to the Constitution supposed to go unquestioned as if it is the God of Abraham from the burning bush that appeared to Moses. It makes me wonder considering our current state of affairs in Washington if this is what the founding fathers imagined? I want to say no not at all. When was the last time we have even tried to amend the Constitution? Should we even have a President? It seems the role in this day and age manifests itself as if it is Monarchy of days past with all the bells and whistles of holding court and the like of it. Is the Congress as well as the Supreme court truly looking out for the best interest of the American people? Or have they been corrupted like the rest of that cesspit we call Washington D.C. When you say Dr. Steve it's time to convene another Convention to determine our countries future as well as a new sense of true Freedom and Liberty I can only say I wish to see the day of that great awakening. Once again thank you for your post it as always promotes me to think.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am reading about your ancestor and his relationship to Geo Washington. He too had a lot questions about the presidency etc. The book is called Washington A Life by Ron Chernow. More coming. Thanks for being an active reader.

      Delete
  2. The strenght of our country is not in our constitution but in our Protestant heritage and our republican form of government…so if rewriting the constitution preserves those institutions them let's get on with it. If not: focus on the real problem: the parasitical banking elite that's virtually bought everything up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think this is all wrong. We don't need a new constitution, we have to stop treating the one we have like a piece of toilet paper. The existing one could certainly use some amendments, especially ones that would take the money out of political campaigns and somehow prevent the way party politics dominates national decision-making. But the main thing is to really do what the original constitution says as intended by its framers. We must turn the Federal Reserve, which is a completely unconstitutional giveaway of the whole country to international bankers back into what the framers intended which is a public Bank of the United States for national economic development. This is the way to make our country great again. We have lost the meaning of our Constitution and with it our identity as Americans. We no longer know who we are. Dr. Pieczenik, I could not possibly disagree more with your account of Abraham Lincoln and American history. I'm beginning to think you are on the wrong side. Now here is some real U.S. history that might help people remember what the political identity of this country is and why we have lost it:

    http://larouchepac.com/andrewjackson

    ReplyDelete
  4. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    Only complete chaos would result.

    Those that have power to manipulate the current state of affairs would have the overwhelming power to manipulate an 'open convention'.

    The forces of darkness thrive on chaos.

    Seems, Dr. Pieczenik is a French Revolutionary born in the wrong century.

    How many innocent died in the French Revolution?

    Disfunctional is throwing up your hands in frustration with the intent of laying hands on and throwing down the structure, itself, the Constitution, which has been a pillar of guaranteeing the fruits of Liberty & Freedom.

    Some call these the 'Blessings of Liberty'.

    Long live the United States Constitution!

    While the present state of America is not healthy, it is no 'Ancien Régime' in need of those who have pretensions of good, but would unlease a fire storm of chaos & destruction on the vast body of innocent citizens.

    Such were the radicals of the French Revolution: "Those must die who would stand in the way of the Revolution, the guilty & innocent, alike, as necessity may dictate."

    Our constitution is a durable article of government of the People, by the People, for the People.

    Sagacious were the Founding Fathers in their research & knowledge of the weaknesses of Republican forms of Government.

    Think of the stresses & strains the Constitution has withstood in its over two centuries of standing guard as an extention of the People's Sovereignty.

    But no article of government is immune to the arrogance & selfishness of a ruling class, full of their own hubris.

    The Constitution is not at fault for the abuses of the Elite. The Elite are responsible for their conduct and them alone.

    It is an immense wrong to blame the Constitution for the Sins of the Elite.

    The Constitution is the Peoples' document.

    For that the People must re-claim their rights.

    God given rights, the Founders freely asserted.

    Lincoln had his faults, but those who ignore the southern state's written declarations of sucession, where slavory was repeatedly embossed as a reason for those declarations. The North's supposed threat to and abuse of the institution of slavory was part of the South's reasons, while the North's reason was to preserve the Union.

    The cartoon presentation of Lincoln as a baboon & ogre (what southern and Democrat editorial cartoonists repeatedly resorted to in the midst of war) is too simplistic a characterization. Lincoln was a complicated man, no cartoon can fully capture.

    More research is encouraged in that area of knowledge.

    Reform requires information and a citizenship hungry for the knowledge needed to understand the reality behind the illusion so often presented by the Elite.

    The best framework for that reform is the Constitution, which provides avenues for peaceful reform and a model for de-centralized government so power resides closest to the People.

    Those who would pose as healers, yet sugget a cliff dive into chaos, neither have the knowledge nor respect for the history of the United States of America that they should.

    Rather than the Constitution being "just a Goddamned piece of paper" as was attributed to George W. Bush (perhaps, apocryphal), the Constitution is a life-line in a hurricane of corruption.

    The Constitution is the Rock in a whirlpool of modern corruption, with this moral corruption born, in large part, of the technological prowess to spy on and build dossier on each individual and the arrogance to think that is a proper way to govern in the name of the People.

    Throwing America into the whirlwind of chaos is the wrong direction to go.

    That is what the Elite want.

    The People should run not walk in the opposite direction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anaconda,

      I agree with your post 100%. Thank you. The kind of "revolution" advocated by Pieczenik does resemble the French, which ended with a Reign of Terror followed by Napoleon. Maybe that's it - Pieczenik is a Bonapartist who was backing Petraeus to be the new Napoleon. We can't tear up our precious Constitution and start over. It has been subverted and corrupted over the course of time. We must throw out the subverters and corrupters who are using our precious heritage for toilet paper. For example, it says that Congress has the power to declare war. Obama's policy of regime change against Libya and Syria was means war. The Constitution does not distinguish between "overt" wars and "covert wars". It just says war, and Obama's policy has been undertaken without consent of Congress and is therefore totally impeachable. So instead of assassinating him, or torching the Constitution, how about backing Congressmen Walter Jones and Charlie Rangel in supportiing HCR 107?
      http://larouchepac.com/hcr107press
      http://larouchepac.com/obamawatch

      Delete
  5. If you want to hold to account those at least partially responsible, look in this direction, not the Constitution:

    The Duties of an Economic Hitman (short synopsis)

    click here for link

    These people never had any respect for the United States Constitution in the first place.

    Why allow their bad conduct as justification for junking the Constitution while their pretended allegiance to the Constitution is only an act?

    No, their allegiance is only to themselves and the furtherence their power & control is their true agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  6. While Dr Pieczenik offers some powerful arguments for something that warrants fleeting consideration, wasn't one of the communist goals to "Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a world-wide basis"?

    Indeed, those are the very excuses we continuously hear from those who would love to change it.

    Certainly some parts can be rewritten with the sole goal to strengthen the concept of enumerated powers and get the central government back to primarily providing little more than a common defense under which we can pursue productive wealth creating endeavors without fear of molestation. But more importantly, who would write the new one? The crooks who have an iron grip on power administering the old one now, consistently and continuously breaking their oaths to abide by it and defend it?

    I believe education is the key. Our lexicons have been manipulated by those who preach love of diversity and independent thought is achieved by conformity to groupthink. They have stolen our children through the centralization of compulsory indoctrination while calling it education and we and the crooks at the state level allowed them to get away with it.

    As for the illusion of the concept of rights supposedly protected by that archaic document along with the Declaration of Independence, our creator didn't give us anything inalienable other than constant struggle along with our senses, intellect, and free will to aid in that struggle. I offer "What the Hell are Rights Anyway? for consideration in this discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I guess what I see as the problem is when you follow an ideology blindly. I understand Jefferson's argument against a perpetual Constitution or law especially because his reasoning seems to be more or so to empower or inspire the new generations. I do not however believe that the current political system in Washington that is incredibly corrupt should be the ones to accomplish this great task. So what do we do? Get rid of the lot of them. I believe your average citizen isn't dumb but needs to eat a few crumbs before they can eat the whole sandwich. I think this year 2013 can be a monumental year of awakening this sleeping Giant we call the American People. As much as I say I am a believer in the Constitution I have witnessed my whole life travesty after travesty committed in it's name. Unfortunately the Men and Women we select in the seat of power determine what the Constitution dictates. If it is a New Constitution we need then so be it! If it is the removal of all the elected whores in D.C. then so be it. It will take Brave men and women that are willing to sacrifice their time to this cause. I will end by saying it is a frustrating tasks with so much mounted against the pursuit of truth. Let's keep an open mind and debate the topic. As JFK said "Through scrutiny comes understanding"

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dr. I think you misunderstand the purpose of the Constitution.

    It is a product of compromise, seated in the idea that it should be very difficult for any arm of government to act at all. It is purposefully intended to make government action cumbersome if not impossible.

    If you want a government which behaves rationally and solves problems with the greater public good in mind then please send me the nearest flying saucer so I can board and be taken to that utopia the aliens have created in their million year head start. Humans aren't up to that task.

    Everytime this country has failed, it has failed because the powers that be went against the letter and spirit of the constitution. If the constitution were religiously followed we wouldn't have had any of the crisies this nation has faced.

    In my opinion the only room for improvement, and I advocate for this, is to amend it to spell out specifically all the otherwise interpreted liberties and protections the courts have granted. For example, I favor an amendment specifically forbiding the government from depriving anyone of life, liberty or property withoug due process of law. I also favor an amendment requiring that no one can be made a prisoner in any jail without actual magistration so that police can no longer simply lock anyone up without proving probable cause. I also favor an amendment ending all criminal statutes in which the behavoir proscribed contains no malice of any kind, or intention to bring injury or damage to anyone.

    The biggest problem this country faces is lack of moral cohension, unity, and common descency which this society used to possess.

    This present generation would be totally incapable of changing the constitution except to mangle it into something even more efficient in doling out privileges to the already well-heeled, and making pressure groups and minorities feel included.

    Personally I think the founders were a generation well above our own in moral consciousness. Whether women or landless people can vote, or whether savages from Africa can be owned as property or not are trivial wrongs compared to the cruelties, insults and injuries common in today's ordinary folk.

    ReplyDelete
  9. And while we're on the topic of slavery, as the media is now engrossed with such due to Hollywood's newest re-writing of it's history for the purpose of sadistic revenge fantasy...

    Having lived and worked intimately with Africans, and people of African descent, let me make the following observation as someone who used to work in the office of a cleared CIA psychiatrist in Texas in which our office monitored former assassins which were settled in the Austin, Texas area...

    Africans are by nature, genetically possessed of a different range of temperament than individuals from other racial groups.

    This has nothing to do with intelligence.

    It has to do with their capacity for experiencing EMPATHY, thier aggressiveness.

    What I saw in my Dr's practice that we would label as "occassional discontrol" or "impulse control outside of the normal range" was in Africa TOTALLY NORMAL AND COMMON.

    But the greatest behavioral difference is the tremendous lack of ability to experience empathy, which in non-Africans would be considered sociopathology, or absence of moral conscience.

    And then there are other issues relating to motivation factors in Africans and genetic Africans which are way outside the normal range of non-Africans. In a few words Africans are motivating almost entirely by status issues alone, to the exclusion of all other factors.

    This is why they will always be savages, and why slave owners who lived with them perceived them as incapable of civilization.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One strong indicator of the Africans' lack of empathy is the way they relate to animals.

      Cruelty to animals is one of the indicators of psychopathology/sociopathology in the NSDM diagnostic manual.

      Anyone who observes African Americans can see that they almost never have pets or companion animals. They are incapable of forming empathetic, emotional bonds with animals.

      In situations in which African Americans are by necessity around animals they are almost always indifferent if not maliciously abusive to the animal.

      All this is in stark contrast to non-Africans.

      Delete
    2. Hey man, I'm actually a great admirer of yours and enjoy reading your comments, but I'm African American, and your post was slightly offensive. I'm not even one of those "_______ is a racist!" type of black people, I know those types who love to pull the race card at any possible chance. Regarding Africans being more aggressive, I'm with you, but the "that's why they are all savages" is taking it a little too far. My dad is a surgeon (I'm Carribbean, from Haiti) we have a pet Lab and some parakeets that the whole family loves deeply and cares for. African parents (or my parents at least) love their children and will willingly bend their back for them (though I don't think more than any other race) so i am in stark disagreement with how you view Africans empathizing.

      So although I'm with you regarding aggressiveness (can't say the same for sociopathy, Wall Street is a sociopath cesspool) to say "that's why they will always be savages" is pretty out there and offensive.

      Delete
    3. I would be offened too, but facts are facts. Having lived with Africans and African Americans I know that they themselves are more aware than white Americans of the brutality and lack of empathy which characterizes themselves in contrast to non-Africans. From the point of view of Africans, white people are weak, stupid people who are sentimentally attached to silly feelings which blacks are too intelligent to possess. Blacks expect that other blacks will always do what it in their own self-interest without any warm and fuzzy emotions of caring about anyone else to get in the way.

      I beleive that their are more refined, advanced alien cultures outside of the human race, and I accept that their intellectual/psychologicial development is well above my own. Among different races of humans there is also pre-determined levels of development which we have no choice but to accept.

      Anyone who wants to believe otherwise has merely to spend any time in Africa and witness the savagry there. In Africa there is no empathy, no creativity, no cooperation, no concern for anyone or anything. There is only self-interest, aggression, violence, deception, and fear.

      Among Africans the only motivator is status. Any African will forgoe money, health, or any other benefit if doing so will lead them to higher status in their societies. Africans are creatures exiting in a pecking order, a pyramid of power and terror in which contentment lies only in being on the top of the pyramid. Once there then other benefits flow, particulary sex with as many young girls as is physically possible with no concern whatever as to what becomes of the offspring. The purpose of sex among Africans is actual procreation, not recreation. Every sexual encounter is for the purpose of creating offspring.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. "From the point of view of Africans, white people are weak, stupid people who are sentimentally attached to silly feelings which blacks are too intelligent to possess."

      Totally untrue, like I said before I'm black and most of my personal heroes (which I would include Dr. Pieczenik in) are white. I'm only 19 years old and I've been reading every blog of Steve's, have been incredibly thankful to have brilliant minds such as yourself and others (which I'm sure are mostly white) to learn from. I'm with you on the aggression thing, but you really think that blacks are more prone to sociopathy than any other type? What about Wall Street? A good portion of our global oligarchy are either white or Jewish, are you going to tell me that some of their behaviors aren't sociopathic? (and that's not to assume that every single last one of them is a sociopath) Look at the history of the CIA, you think the people who orchestrated the overthrow of democracies on behalf of oil and business interests weren't sociopathic? And I'm sure that in the first few decades of the CIA, it was mainly composed of whites.

      And regarding savagery in Africa, I blame that more on poverty/poor education than on the inherent nature of Africans. I just think it's ignorant to assume that every single African is like the ones that you have met and lived with. There are always exceptions. You're too smart to generalize and assume that every single last African is a savage. There are some of us who are very cultured, intelligent, sensible, and empathetic (although no more than any other race.

      Delete
    6. I am not claiming that every single African possesses the characteristics I've described. My observation is that the "range" of charactersitics is different for Africans than non-Africans, and therefore there are going to be individual outlyers who run counter to the mean.

      God only knows among whites there are outlyers who are devoid of empathy and incapable of social cooperation also.

      In describing aggregate issues I have to employ generalities which describe the overall trend or condition.

      My opinion on the whole matter can be stated this way: Whites are capable of a thin and highly flawed form of civilization, and are capable only of flawed self-governance. Africans are not even capable of that.

      No one is more critical of whites than I am. The average white person possesses a rather precarious commitment to the moral values he claims to have. Most white people are rationalizing, self-interested, lazy, sanctimonious and hypocritical. However, most whites have strong enough sense of compassion and sense of guilt that civilization works a lot of the time.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. I am truly appalled to hear such racist garbage, and coming from a guy claiming to be a psychiatrist of assassins, that is men of violence, cold-blooded murderers whose feelings must be so screwed up that they are incapable of normal human human relations, endlessly tortured by anxiety and guilt, depressed, suicidal, alcoholic...you name it.

      Delete
    9. I said I worked in a psychiatrist's office. Our patients were former military personnel who had to be monitored because of their very violent histories, including assassination.

      There were two types of patients. One type was ordinary men who suffered from guilt, anxiety, depression, etc. because as my boss said, "they were made to do things they were not raised to do..."

      The other type were psychopaths, and they had to monitored not because they were suffering, but because they enjoyed violence and were a menace to the public.
      Among this latter group was David Strier, who was categorized as having psychopathic traits, but these were due to physical leisons in his brain resulting from head injuries sustained while fighting illegally underage in New York.

      As for being a racist I'm sorry but facts are facts. There are huge differences between racial groups, not in terms of intelligence, but in terms of other measurable personality characteristics such as empathy, aggression, etc.

      For that matter it's politically and acedemically taboo to discuss national character either, but without that discipline I would never have been able to understand anything in my government work, which was psychological warfare.

      Please refrain from name calling.

      If you have facts then lets hear them.

      Delete
    10. I want to mention that these two types of people who performed assassinations SHOULD INFORM US ABOUT TODAY'S POLICE OFFICERS.

      Unfortunately there is no effective screening to weed out psychopaths from joining police academies today.

      Perhaps as many as half of all police graduated today from academies have STRONG PSYCHOPATHIC TENDANCIES.

      This used not to be the case.

      However as the criminal laws have become more focused on compliance of ordinary people to criminal codes that have nothing to do with malevolent behaviors, the TYPES of people who are attracted to law enforcement has become more malicious.

      In the past police wanted to protect the public from rapists, robbere and killers.

      Today's police are more interested in locking people up for not having insurance, not wearing a seatbelt, or possessing marijuana or forgetting the prescription bottle for the xanex.

      This is why at least 50% of our BLACK UNIFORMED "officers" are now psychopaths.

      Notice they don't wear blue uniforms anymore?

      Delete
  10. it is not the Constitution that is at the heart of the matter, it is the lawlessness of the rigged elections, which a newcomer is oppositionally investigated by the incumbent,and has only a minimal chance of success.

    it is the deviants that rise to power via illegal moneylaundering.....
    the same deviants such as Byrd, a KKK grand wizard and a pedophile, along with Gerald Ford....
    the same deviants who frequent and need their fix at Bohemian Grove....
    these are the criteria for inadmissable mental incompetence to be elected to lead and allocate money in any capacity.

    Obama is a severe malignant evil deviant, but we will bust that open at a more opportune time.
    did you know his favorite jogging route is through Arlington National Cemetary, a man who has never served and doesn't even know how to salute?

    it is people like demented Harry Reid who is undeserving in every way of the responsibibilty he ignores by flouting the laws and his duties.

    if anything needs to be corrected is an amendment: an "entrance exam" for office proving by ruling out malfeasance, drug addiction, fraudulent identities, and general fraud, that the appicant is of sound mind and unencumbered by undue influence.

    The Constitution is not obsolete; the elected leaders have chosen to ignore it and apply their roadmap to the Communist Manifesto.
    That is the way of Europe as I write this, and that is the intention of the puppeteers of Bari Hussein Obama Little Shabazz.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please pass this on to every freedom loving American you know:

      http://www.infowars.com/new-york-times-op-ed-lets-give-up-on-the-constitution/

      Delete
    2. Why anyone would take seriously anything conveyed by the New York Times is a mystery to me.

      The NYT is exactly what my hero Noam Chomsky describes it as being - merely another flag-waving, patriotic bunch of gullible nationalistic idiots who can always be counted on to overlook anyone with and credentials or expertise in something in favor or what the masses of people want to hear.

      Did I say "weapons of mass destruction?

      Did I say "Saddam's nuclear ambitions?

      Take the NYT and throw it in the trash where it belongs.

      Delete
  11. What was the civil war really about?

    I'll tell you.

    If Lincoln had let the Confederate states leave the Union he would have gone down in history as a villian. For a hundred years his name would have been cursed in both north and south as the reason why the Union was dissolved. This was the only reason why he moved desperately to prevent it.

    Lincoln was a narcissistic, self-absorbed, self-pitying sociopath and criminal [his law practice was based on corruption and bribery] who was obcessed with his own glory and place in history.

    The ONLY reason why he pursued the war at all costs and imposed colossal sacrifices on millions was to reverse what would otherwise have been a personal disgrace and humiliation unequalled in history.

    None of his various Generals was willing to prosecute the war in the unlimited manner necessary to crush the south, until he finally recruited two fellow sociopaths - Grant and Sherman.

    All the sane, normal people of the north and south just wanted the conflict resolved by negotiation, compromise, or anything other than brut force.
    The scale of the rape, plunder, murder and desease which was spawn by that "war" was colossal. The actual battlefield deaths and injuries were minor by comparison to the conflict's other horrors.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Treasonous Anglophile slavocrats seceded from the Union and Lincoln saved it. Unfortunately he got assassinated before he could finish the job. Those insidious treasonous bastards are still around. You don't like Linclon? What's next, was George Washington a bum too? I'm sure the British thought so.

      Delete
    2. Treason as defined in the Constitution is making war on another state by a state or the Federal government, which is what Lincoln did.

      The southern states engaged in no treason or even rebellion because it was the duly-empowered legislatures of those states which voted to separate from the union. The union was, and is, a voluntary organization.

      As far as Washington is concerned, he was a slave owning southerner who put out bounties and rewards for escaped slaves he owned. He believed in the rightness of slavery given that the slaves in question were savages who if not enslaved in the western hemisphere would have merely been slaves of their various despitic "chiefs" in Africa, who routinely raped, tortured, enslaved, and killed their subjects for "fun," as Tarantino so aptly puts it.

      Washington believed in self-determination and the right of states to govern themselves along republican principles - and that meant only men of property could vote - not women and not blacks.

      Delete
  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I forgot to say I haven't seen "Django Unchained" yet but I plan to this weekend. I love Tarantino. His movies are practically the only ones I bother to watch anymore. The man is a true artist. I have no problems with either the violence or the handling of race. It's all done with great taste as far as I'm concerned. A Tarantino movie is a cinematic feast to me. Spike Lee is a whining liberal crybaby.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm in the same boat as you. I saw the film last week and it's definitely one of Tarantino's better ones, and that's saying a lot considering his filmography. You'll love it, he really is a true artist.

      Delete
    2. Reggie D, keep up the inquiry of life.

      There is a lot to learn.

      Perhaps the most important thing is that you are grappling with the complexities, the grey areas.

      (Sometimes, it's not grey, but black & white -- there is unremitting selfishness & arrogance in this world, many call this "evil".)

      To grasp the nettle is to examine an area of inquiry which may conflict with pre-existing ideas or understanding of what is the reality of a given situation.

      As far as Africa is concerned, Reggie D, you are right. It's a tough environment and politically speaking, an environment, at least partly, created by western (white) imperialists.

      And you handled your responses with aplomb. It is hard to say what Africans would be like without western imperialism and interference, which has worked to effect all levels of African societies.

      Considering all the comments, here on Dr. Pieczenik's blog, including my own, folks have individual perspectives.

      Each perspective a little different (or a lot, depending on the topic).

      So, keep searching for the truth.

      We can all keep working on our humanity, even if we're a 103 years old... :-)

      Delete
    3. Tarantino is a manic depressive sociopath who praises violence and praises war.

      The fact that the same members posting here who criticize my anti-violent message based on race are also the ones praising the sadistic violence of "Django Unchained" or "Inglorious Bastards" merely makes my case for me.

      I am opposed to sadistic violence.

      Unfortuanately members of the African race, and whites like Tarantino [who's mother used to date only black men, and serially] think sadistic violence is "fun," in Tarantino's words.

      Delete
  14. Dr. Pieczenik, you are sorely misguided on this one. While the Constitution was hatched riddled with imperfections, do note that many of these imperfections (e.g. slaves as 3/5ths of a human) were corrected by means of the Constitution and its capacity for amending itself. Granted, it has at times amended itself in the direction of imperfection (meaning: depriving citizens of certain liberties, such as with prohibition), but the experimental character of it allows this to happen, so that mistakes can be learned from.

    Its biggest flaw however is in its inability to prevent the situation we have now, whereby the instrument it empowers - the U.S. Government - has become the vehicle for its complete evisceration by officials who hypocritically take the oath to defend it. I suspect you have your share of violations on this count as well. Through this blog and elsewhere, however, you have become somewhat of a one man Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and that is appreciated.

    I would completely concur with MITmichael on his initial comment, in suggesting amendments to prevent the disaster we now have, if it weren't for his follow-ups... It's almost as if he were here to discredit the defenders of the Constitutions by adding a pseudo-scientific rant that had me thinking for a second that I was reading Houston Stewart Chamberlain. It smacks of "cognitive infiltration" -MITmichael, is your real name Cass Sunstein?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. correction: "defenders of the Constitution" singular.

      And on the subject of race and slavery, while yes many of the founders were slave-owners, it should be noted that one of the grievances that Jefferson listed against King George in the Declaration of Independence was the imposition of slavery. Unfortunately, this was scratched from the signed document. Had they been able to wash their hands of the practice at the beginning, it would have saved the young nation all whole lot of trouble, trouble we're still dealing with, e.g. the case of the perhaps most impeachable president in U.S. history, but one who will probably go unimpeached on account of white guilt.

      Also, there is a great irony in the fact that the amendment that ended slavery was also the amendment that perversely gave birth to the conception of corporate personhood, which has proven to be the real "alien invasion" - another flaw that needs to be corrected.

      Delete
    2. Give this republic another 50 or 100 years of history and you'll find that "white guilt" will be a thing of the past.

      As more and more whites have personal contact and personal interactions with Africans they will dispose of the myths and doctrines of the media and politics and re-shape their views on racial matters.

      Unfortunately race relations will become ever more difficult as the current experiment at racial integration proves itself a failure.

      Delete
    3. Remember, Lincoln first attempted to have all the freed black slaves removed to Africa, stating that blacks and whites could never live together.

      It was only after he realized that the south would be ungovernable without blacks voting for the Republican party did he declare his intention to give black men the vote...something white women in the south didn't have.

      Go figure.

      Delete
    4. Yes my commentary was a rant. But it came about because of what's happened in the film industry in the last months regarding "Lincoln" and "Django."

      These issues of re-casting history to fit with current doctrine is what's raising these painful issues to the boiling point.

      Why'd Speilberg have to lie about Lincoln's views on blacks? Why? Why did Tarantino have to lie about slavery and then declare that "Django" is more accurate than any formal history on the subject?

      It's the people who KNOW THEIR VIEWS ARE WRONG who continue to rub salt into the wounds by producing these sadistic, violent products in the name of "tolerance."

      Delete
  15. Void the Act of 1871 and the Verona Treaty and we will see how a constitutional form of government works. Until such time, none of us as well as our forefathers/mothers have ever lived under a constitutional form of government.

    The very suggestion of throwing out what we've been lead to believe the entirety of our lives was the basis of our government, when in fact we haven't lived under it since the Civil War, clearly demonstrates one's serious lack of study of American political history. While you're at it read King David's charter/treatise signed by our Founding Fathers.

    As for the comment above about blacks and empathy, I must say I am beyond highly offended. Never have I met, worked or played with a black person who showed a lack of empathy especially towards animals. And yes, my background is in psychotherapy.

    Amazingly the poster based his thesis on a study of assassins. Assassins! Who by definition lack empathy, moral fiber and anything else remotely related to a healthy loving sense of self whether they are black, white, purple or orange. What pure rubbish and an insult to ANY thinking person!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I never said my prior work with former assassins influenced my knowledge of the lack of empathy among Africans.

      All the sociopaths and non-sociopaths among the assassins I worked with were white, not African.

      It is widely accepted that 2 to 3 percent of whites are psychopaths or sociopaths.

      As for Africans a very small percentage possess the level of empathy considered as the mean for non-Africans.

      Ask any veteranarian if any blacks come into their office as pet owners. Blacks almost never own pets, and if they do it'll be aggressive dogs like pit bulls, etc.

      I've never heard of any black person having a cat as a pet.

      All of this is of course widely known and accepted as normal among African Americans themselve, and it's only the docrinally-miseducated whites who continue to hold these misconceptions.

      When Michael Vick was prosecute for animal cruelty do you recall what Oprah Winfrey said about the role of pets, particularly dogs, in African-American society? Look it up.

      I lived and worked for years in Africa, and the stories of routine animal cruelty I could tell you would just not be beleived. Extreme cruelty to animals in Africa is normal and accepted.

      Delete
  16. "The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home." -- James Madison

    "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." -- James Madison

    "The advancement and diffusion of knowledge is the only guardian of true liberty." -- James Madison

    Seems what Madison was warning of then is just as relevant, today.

    Take a look at some quotes of James Madison, the Father of the Constitution:

    Link quotes of James Madison

    Some people claim that human civilization or more specifically, American Civilization, is too complex and has evolved too much since the Founding Fathers, so that "their" form of government is outdated.

    But when you read the quotes of the Founding Fathers, you see the concerns they had in their day are the same as our concerns today.

    Why?

    Because human nature hasn't changed.

    Because the quest for power hasn't changed.

    Those who want to remove the constraints the Constitution places on the government are unwitting tools for the would-be tyrants among us.

    The Elite have no use for Constitutions which limit their power.

    I'm just surprised that a "brainy" person, such as Dr. Pieczenik, would fall for a pitch which would ultimately destroy the Republic.

    Many of the smartest among us, citizens, are the most useful to subvert the Constitution.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The founders fully expected that tyrants would seek to arise, and would be very surprised to learn that we've managed as well as we have.

      The founders were extremely cynical people, and it was their skepticism about human nature which contintues to protect us today.

      Madison in particular was a genius, and he was also a slave owning southerner.

      Most of the founders were slave owning southerners.

      The people of the north contributed comparitively little to the cause of self-determination from the Crown, except for the lunatics of Boston, who subsequently became abolishionists even though they wouldn't let blacks live among them or vote.

      They were lunatic hypocrites.

      Delete
    2. In fact the people of Boston are some of the most wacked people anywhere. They're wrong on gun control, wrong on manditory health and liability insurance. Boston is a crime-ridden corrupt mess of vulgarians. I've never lived in a city where houses and neighborhoods were as bleak and nightmarish as the Boston area. In the 18th century the "sons of liberty" were cruel terrorists, and after independence Boston became the radical seat of abolishion of slavery, although no one there ever even knew any slaves.

      For those who merely go to college there they live in ivory towers. However wherever I live I try to stay away from fellow intellectuals and "educated" people [who I find stupid in practical life knowledge].

      Where ever I live I prefer to associate with street people, factory workers, and the underworld.

      To me this is the real world, and real people.

      The learning people obtain from universities and professors is nothing but groundless doctrine.

      Delete
    3. I agree with my hero Noam Chomsky when he says, "social 'sciences' are so theoretically thin that they can't be considered 'sciences' at all..."

      I agree with him that social studies are merely politically-correct conjecture and doctrine.

      Particularly regarding the equivalency of cultures and races.

      Show me a culture other than western
      Europe which has produced anything like "Romeo and Juliet," or the paintings of Carravaggio.

      When you leave the western tradition you leave behind empathy, compassion, and bliss.

      Outside of western Europe all there is merely despoitism and a hobbean jungle.

      Delete
    4. If there is any hope for the masses of people on this planet to reach for happiness in their lives the western European values must triumph over all.

      Uber alles.

      Delete
  17. Now my red flag goes up!!

    What pray will we replace our current constitution with? One that is made by the people responsible for electing our current leaders?

    No way!

    Better to stick with what we have and defend it until our deaths!!

    Sounds like two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. Not interested in being served up on plate with an apple in my mouth!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know what the red flag means but when the civil war broke out and Lincoln's volunteers threatened to invade and kill the people of Virginia General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson said, "Give them the BLACK FLAG! Give those killers and invaders no quarter! Give them the BLACK FLAG!"

      And if any other states raised an army of "volunteers" to invade my state by force of arms and kill anyone who resisted them I'd feel pretty much the same way.

      I've never flown a Confederate flag outside my home, or adorned my mercedes with it in the back window, but maybe.....

      Delete