Mediaboss Marketing

James Marks

Martinsburg

In recent years I've begun to wonder how our founding fathers might have drafted the Constitution differently had they known what our country, our citizens and our politicians would have become over time. Bear in mind that our Constitution is bar none, the most perfect governmental document contrived by man in the history of planet Earth, and keeping in mind that over the last two and a half centuries, we as a nation, have grown and evolved in our wisdom and learned from our mistakes to make us a more perfect union; i.e.; amendments to that same Constitution.

One thing that comes to mind is the issue of career politicians. Putting it another way, professional politicians might more accurately describe it. Productive or not, successful in accomplishing goals for the people, or not, was that the intention of the framers of our form of government? Since the period of his terms in office of public service by Franklin Roosevelt, the 22nd Amendment not withstanding, and up through occurrences more recently, it isn't uncommon for public servants to remain in office for multiple decades. This immediately bring to mind Joe Biden, now serving almost a half a century! Reflecting on President Washington's thoughts on a third term...he stepped aside to make way for a successor, proving to future generations (and his contemporary critics) his commitment to democracy rather than power. All this in remembering that initially Washington was a farmer, turned general, turned President! In lieu of present trends, I wonder if the framers might have contemplated term limits. I would doubt it considering the vast majority of Congressmen had to maintain their jobs outside of their congressional duties, so being full time politicians would have been out of the question, but I still would make one wonder.

A second thought is on how the creators of our nation might have looked on their first Amendment to our Constitution, more specifically the aspect of Freedom of the Press. Certainly there were contentious articles published in newspapers in the late 1700's and early 1800's to spark debate and maybe even dissension. Bringing that forward to today's journalistic environment and calling it contentious or debatable would be a momentous understatement. In America's press today, blatant disregard for honesty, the truth and facts are the rule, not the exception. Politically motivated, distorted and biased, and total untruths in the characterizing of facts, of quotes from words spoken, and of outcomes of actions taken by political officials is now the norm in America's press today. The Associated Press even more so exacerbates the issue. Have the printed word, radio broadcasts and television news reporting outlets not become the mouthpiece and literally an extension of a political party? And of course over time, this has been compounded and multiplied exponentially by the advent of radio and television, not to mention social media and the cell phone. And unlike the press of our colonial and founding period, the spewing of truths made into lies and lies into truth throughout media today is an occurrence on a moment by moment event that is immediately disseminated to millions of citizens. Maybe our founding fathers in their thoughts on the printing of untruths and non-facts, instituted the 1st Amendment with the thought being if given enough rope, they will hang themselves, proverbially speaking. Time will tell, I guess. But I do have to wonder had they known then what occurs today, would they have considered limits and boundaries on those freedoms, commensurate with the degree of honesty, accuracy, and the truthfulness of the articles they would present to the public?

How often today do we watch and listen to a news broadcast reported to us, particularly on a national issue, and think to ourselves, how can they be reporting that, when we know full well it to be untrue? How frequently do we open the newspaper to read an Associated Press article on the Peaceful Protest in a given metropolitan city, where in fact, a violent mob has destroyed property and peoples lives, and we are fully aware it is totally untrue, nonfactual, a blatant lie?

I reflect from the 1960's on my memory of Pravda (the Communist News Agency, i.e. propaganda machine) on how some news/information was revealed on a given subject that was so filled with untruths that it was literally comical, were it not on a subject of grave consequences. And now in today's context of what is offered up as news is so flagrantly deceitful, it is beyond comical and fringes on infuriating! My bet is that our founders are rolling over in their graves when it comes to the freedoms they have provided in this aspect of their and our First Amendment.

View original post here:
Had our Founding Fathers known then what we know now - Martinsburg Journal