Originally Posted by jazzguru
Nevermind. That statement is about as far from Libertarian as you can get.
Indeed. It also betrays a rather frightening underlying philosophy. It would appear as if tonton thinks that government give people their rights. This is a dangerous position.
NOTE: It also indicates a complete ignorance of (or disregard for) the 9th amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Or, perhaps, that amendment doesn't indicate that the people have as many rights as I think it does.
An eloquently letter written to the Washington Post
Enjoying an uproariously good time poking fun at the Tea Party, Richard Cohen helpfully explains that its adherents’ insistence on strict interpretation of the Constitution is the result of a “fatuous infatuation” with that document – is the consequence of a yokel-like refusal to recognize that the Constitution is valuable “only because it has been wisely adapted to changing times. To adhere to the very word of its every clause hardly is respectful to the Founding Fathers” (“Republicans under a spell,” Sept. 21).
Question for Mr. Cohen: if government officials and the courts are free to choose which words of the Constitution to “adhere to” and which to ignore, what meaning does the Constitution really possess? And why did the Founding Fathers struggle so hard during the long, hot summer of 1787 over the precise wording of the Constitution? Why didn’t they – to ensure that they would win the respect of future generations of Very Smart Persons – simply draft a document that reads “Government may do whatever it judges to be best for The People” and leave it at that?
Donald J. Boudreaux
I really can't figure out why so many people (liberals in particular, though certainly not exclusively) don't recognize the US constitution as a document intending to limit, constrain and hamper the power of the central government and, instead, appear to take the exact opposition interpretation, that it is a document that given the federal government wide, vast, expansive powers. All evidence goes against this interpretation. Strange.