Poll on the Constitution

[Jane Galt]

http://www.micropoll.com/a/MicroPollData?id=3774457&mode=html

[Peter Franks]

On 4/29/2013 1:51 PM, Jane Galt wrote:
> http://www.micropoll.com/a/MicroPollData?id=3774457&mode=html

"The United States Constitution is an old obsolete document, created by
rich white slave owners over 200 years ago. Should it be repealed, to
allow modern government to govern us more efficiently?"

Dissection:

"The United States Constitution is an old ... document"
True.

"The United States Constitution is an ... obsolete document"
False.
The fundamental aspects contained in the Declaration of Independence,
the formation and purpose of a constitutional republic, and the implicit
and explicit protections from an overarching government are more
relevant today than ever.

"created by rich white slave owners"
Irrelevant.
The principles contained in the constitution are important and true
because of the 'what', not the 'who'.

"over 200 years ago."
True.
This makes it MORE relevant and applicable, as it has (generally) stood
the test of time and weathered the incessant attacks of the
liberal/socialist/totalitarian.

"Should it be repealed"
No, never.
It should be amended, however, to strengthen and (re)affirm the rights
of the people and the protections from a tyrannical government gone wild.

"to allow modern government to govern us more efficiently?
False.
Modern government is a synonym for big government. Look around, is
there any place that has a big government that is doing well? So-called
'modern' governments are nothing but socialist machines, and should be
repudiated at every possible chance.

[Jeff Strickland]

"Peter Franks" <no...@none.com> wrote in message
news:klmokb$ss9$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 4/29/2013 1:51 PM, Jane Galt wrote:
>> http://www.micropoll.com/a/MicroPollData?id=3774457&mode=html
>
> "The United States Constitution is an old obsolete document, created by
> rich white slave owners over 200 years ago. Should it be repealed, to
> allow modern government to govern us more efficiently?"
>
> Dissection:
>
> "The United States Constitution is an old ... document"
> True.
>
> "The United States Constitution is an ... obsolete document"
> False.
> The fundamental aspects contained in the Declaration of Independence, the
> formation and purpose of a constitutional republic, and the implicit and
> explicit protections from an overarching government are more relevant
> today than ever.
>
> "created by rich white slave owners"
> Irrelevant.
> The principles contained in the constitution are important and true
> because of the 'what', not the 'who'.
>

The relevence of the comment, "created by ..." is one of emotion. If rich
white guys from yesteryear wrote an old, obsolete document, then surely this
is yet another reason to throw the document into the scrap heap of history.

The _wording_ of the poll appears tyo invoke a Yes vote to scrap the whole
mess and start over, but the poll results are resoundingly, No. The
implication of the poll is that the constitution is worthless -- why even
have a poll to suggest replacing something that works? -- and is of no value
anymore.

I happen to agree with you that the constitution is worth preserving, and is
more important today than it has ever been, but there is certainly relevence
to the way the polling question was posed. The wording says, 'the
constitution is outdated and it must go, do you agree?' The question even
slants the response to the affirmative by listing up emotional qualities
instead of factual ones. Yes, it is fact that the constitution was written
200 years ago by men long sinced dead and that were generally (if not
completely) members of the upper crust of society of their day, but to list
these qualities in a poll question is purely emotional.

I would suggest that the question was crafted to find the truly stupid
people that go through life without a clue. The poll has found none of those
people, yet.