Et tu, Charles?

It is somewhat remarkable how quickly the punditry class picks up on hip, new words and phrases.  We had never heard of “metadata” until recently and now it’s just all that! and nothing to be afraid of.  And of course if we have heard “the Supreme Court has held….” once we have heard it five hundred times in the past week.  Yes, and the Supreme Court also “held” that Obamacare was legitimate because it was a tax.

For the record, we do value, in many areas,  the judgements, opinions and sentiments of the right-wing commentator class on some aspects of the NSA “scandals” coming to light.  They are patriots all, but we just feel that they are falling into some of the same old traps that the statists have been setting for years, swatting at strawmen the statists set up and in general, taking their eyes off the prize.  (We think this is why Obama was re-elected in 2012, but that’s another side to the same coin.)

We’ll get to Charles in a moment, but, this being a followup to our earlier piece on constitutional abrogations, let us insert here two items:  First, for those who have insisted that the Feds are only looking at the “metadata”,  there is this.  That seems to be corroboration of what the bogeyman, Snowden, said about his being able to go in and get anything he wanted and, presumably, to do with it whatever he wanted.

And then there’s this:

The CIA is preparing to deliver arms to rebel groups in Syria through clandestine bases in Turkey and Jordan that were expanded over the past year in an effort to establish reliable supply routes into the country for nonlethal material, U.S. officials said.

Excuse us if we chuckle at the notion that this Snowden character is Keith Olbermann’s “Worst Person in the World” for telling the American people what they already knew – that their government was spying on them – and yet at the very same time, it is coming straight from the mouths of U.S. OFFICIALS what our “clandestine” operations are in the Turkey/Syria region.

And more.  Why is it that not even a fraction of the time and energy and wordy expertise being directed at us Americans, reassuring us that we have nothing to fear but Fear itself, is spent on campaigning to unshackle United States troops from the Rules of Engagement overseas that are preventing them from defeating the enemy on the field of battle so that we may retain our liberties at home?

Again for the record, Andy McCarthy, Bob Tyrell and so many other patriots are preaching to the choir as they apparently try to convince us that there is still a threat from terrorists and especially Islamic Jihad. We know all that. But as we tried to point out in our earlier piece, the US government has been in possession of quite a bit of “data” concerning Benghazi, Taliban IED bombers, Nidal Hasan, the Tsarnev brothers, et cetera and failed miserably. Further, we were previously encouraged by many of the same pundits admonishing us not to worry about our freedoms and privacies these days,  that the reason we were fighting overseas was so we wouldn’t have to worry about things here at home. WELL???
**********************************************
Turning now to Charles. That would be Charles Krauthammer, in our estimation one of the most discerning men in America. Here’s what Charles had to say about the Constitution of the United States of America:

“…….the Constitution is not a treaty with the rest of the world; it’s an instrument for the protection of the American citizenry.”

We will agree wholeheartedly with Charles that the Constitution is not a treaty with the rest of the world. That is why we think Afghanistan needs to be, shall we say, “pacified.”
As did Iraq and as soon shall be Iran. But when Charles talks about the Constitution being an instrument for the protection of Americans, in the context we all are talking about, he is talking about the physical protection of Americans. The Constitution does contain some sporadic provisions for that, but the physical protection of Americans is NOT the raison d’etre of the United States Constitution. Charles Krauthammer is of course a psychiatrist and only secondarily a Constitutional scholar. (We are neither. 🙂  )But as to the purpose of the Constitution, and the reason for there being a United States of America, there is a lot more, and may we suggest more important, rationale, for it’s existence, so we end today with this:

We the People  of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

And this:

What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

And If you read the full text of Patrick Henry’s famous oration, you will note some troubling similarities between attitudes in the conservative towers of US society today and those Patrick Henry was trying to wake up a quarter of a millenium ago. It can be found here.

bobmontgomery

Poor. No advanced degrees. Unorganized. Feeble. Disjointed. Random. Past it. .... Intrigued, Interested, Patriotic and Lucky.