Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Cracks in the Constitution Hardcover – April, 1982
Customers who bought this item also bought
What other items do customers buy after viewing this item?
This is true:What you think you know about the Constitutuion of the UNited States is probably false…even-and especially-if you are well educated. Twelve years ago, a book appeared which told the story of the lords of wealth and their glittering clans. It was titled The Rich and the Super-Rich. It has become a classic. Since then , Ferdinand Lundberg has devoted himself to research and writing on a subject not unrelated to the domains of wealth:the United States Constitution. hat he found was material hitherto concealed from most readers and believers in the Constitution. What he concludes is that the Constitution is an unrestricted instrument of government that carries within it powers more vast than its citizens imagine-and that it is defective. Lundberg points out that because it is unrestricted, it conveys, for example, unlimited taxing powers. Unlimited. Another example:It conveys unlimited power to "raise armies"-any sort of armies,domestic or foreign. The President may use these armies anywhere. As for who goes into the armies, the government determines that. It can put anyone into the armies and keep them there as long as it wishes:for life if it so determines.
If you are a seller for this product, would you like to suggest updates through seller support?
Top Customer Reviews
Some things I learned:
"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding." -Article VI
This convoluted sentence which is Article VI in its entirety, dictates that just about anything the government does is the "supreme Law of the Land" "any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." Which means that some congressman's pork spending bill when passed has equal gravity as the Constitution itself! Every Executive Order is the Supreme Law of the Land. Every rule and regulation written by bureaucrats as the result of any law becomes the Supreme Law of the Land. And all of that legal verbiage is automatically Constitutional.
Aside: [I know there are those who will say that the above quote refers to the "Constitution" of "any State" and not the glorious and holy federal Constitution. That argument is a red herring because it misses the point. All laws are automatically considered Constitutional. This Section is ambiguous for a reason. The men who wrote this document were intelligent and skilled with language to a degree beyond most of us who are the products of what passes for education in our era. They knew laws would be passed in Congress that would fail to be in compliance of the Constitution. That is exactly what they wanted or they would have not been ambiguous about "Constitution" and simply would have written "Constitutions or Laws of any States to the contrary notwithstanding". Furthermore, laws are to be merely "in Pursuance" of the Constitution. Something which pursues something is not required to catch it. And the fact remains that it has been long accepted that any cockamamie law passed or executive order or federal rule or act of the federal corporation becomes indeed "the supreme Law of the Land." until ruled otherwise. Our Constitution, in effect, is thousands of volumes long. No human being can begin to understand it. It is a playground for lawyers bent on mischief.
The Constitution is a fraud with several technical outs that make the Bill of Rights a joke. The technicalities favor the government. This sacred document says a lot of pretty things in the Bill of Rights but it allows the government to go its sleazy way "notwithstanding."
Not only that, Dear Birthers, the Constitution never defines "natural born Citizen" and there are many who define that holy state as falling on the child of a citizen of the United States notwithstanding (to use a constitutional term) that child's place of birth. The argument against Obama essentially rests on English common law that reckons "natural born Citizen" on the father's status (not American, in Obama's case) rather than either parent or both parents or the mother's status (undeniably American). This is why Birthers never so much as gave a thought to the fact that John McCain was born in the Canal Zone, which was not and is not part of the United States, since his father was a Citizen of the good old USA, and an Admiral too, as opposed to an African leftist. So all this energy spent on proving that Obama isn't a natural born Citizen is a royal waste of time based on a misunderstanding of the Constitution (perhaps thinking it is some kind of an unerring holy document from God and Jesus, representing a kind of higher morality) and an archaic sexist interpretation of "natural born Citizen."
The Constitution, in effect, allows anything to the government! This is why the Supreme Court can rule any damn nonsense they want (Bush v. Gore, corporations are people too) and see any damn thing in the Constitution that comes into their heads. Also, you may not know that the Constitution gives Congress the power to pass laws that are exceptions to review by the court, simply by indicating so on the law. That means Congress could pass a law doing anything in the world (like make ID chips mandatory, make dogs citizens, declare themselves royalty, anything!), tag it an exception to review by the Supreme Court and it would be permanently legal. (Read Article III, Section 2, paragraph 2 very closely if you don't believe me.) Isn't that wonderful? The Court can see anything in the Constitution it pleases and the Congress can hoist a finger to the Court whenever they want. So now you know that the problem is not with the Congress, the President, or the Court. The problem is inherent in the Constitution itself. How do you like this sacred silly putty document now? adapted from my blog [...]
This book is an impassioned and intelligent look at what the Constitution can and can't do. This isn't just an opinion piece. Lundberg is firmly grounded in looking at history to understand the dynamics of American power. Quite an accomplishment.