Trump blames Constitution

A mere 100 days after swearing to uphold the Constitution, President Trump blamed it for impeding his agenda.

 

Recently, Trump called the Constitution a “very rough” and “archaic” system that is “really bad for the country.” Angered by being checked and resentful of being balanced, President Trump the liberal is sounding less and less like candidate Trump the conservative.

Truth be told, hardly anyone these days understands the Constitution or cares about how it’s supposed to work, least of all Supreme Court justices or so-called constitutional experts.

The original Constitution was, in fact, an elaborate system of provisions designed to maintain self-government through concurrent majorities. Using a system of vetoes, concurrent majorities counteract the tendency of sinful, human-operated government to oppression and abuse. They equalize and rectify the action of the government in reference to the various and diversified interests of the community.

But the original Constitution contained a flaw that, under Abraham Lincoln, would prove fatal. Though well-intended, the framers violated the principle of concurrent majority by proposing a single executive or president, a system far more prone to usurpation than a plural executive. In the 1840s, America’s greatest statesman, John C. Calhoun, identified this flaw and how to fix it.

Calhoun proposed an amendment to create a dual executive – two presidents, each possessing a veto power on the other, and elected from different constituencies, South and North. He explained how this dual system would protect and harmonize all states and sections and preserve America’s union with liberty.

Sadly, tragically, the people of the North rejected Calhoun’s plan and inaugurated thereby a long, bloody, fratricidal war that would destroy American freedom and render the Constitution the dead letter it is today.

Winston McCuen

Aiken, S.C.

 

More

Mon, 12/11/2017 - 10:28

Letter: Rational choices for terror

Mon, 12/11/2017 - 10:13

Letter: For ‘the least of these’