Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As I have repeatedly said I trust the governmennt to act constitutionally, and they always do. You seem to believe you are the arbiter of all that is constitutional, your not. Because a politician does something you view as unconstitutional it doesn't make it so. It certainly doesn't make their actions intentionally unconstitutional. We have a supreme court to sort out these issues.
haha wow you REALLY wanna go there? I suggest you don't or you WILL look and sound stupid.
No the Supreme court is the arbiter of what is Constitutional, I do not know what led you to believe that I believe otherwise, save for the fact you cannot defend your assertion that you should just blindly trust the government to act in constitutional ways. With that said congress and the executive routinely do unconstitutional things and they get sued for it all the time in case where the non governmental party wins. Thus why so many Supreme court cases are X v. US or US v. X. The "US" is the US government and they are often being sued for violating the Constitution and sometime the Supreme court finds that they are violating the constitution.
And again, that is why we have a supreme court. And of course the SCOTUS decides what is constitutional, so the government always act constitutionally.
And again, that is why we have a supreme court. And of course the SCOTUS decides what is constitutional, so the government always act constitutionally.
Ok lets go back to 8th grade for a second. The Federal Government is not one unitary thing. It has 3 branches the Executive, Legislative and Judicial.
The Supreme Court is part of the government, more specifically the Judicial branch. They are the arbiters of what is Constitutional. That doesn't mean the other 2 branches, which are also part of the federal government, don't do unconstitutional things. You can say certainly trust the supreme court to act in Constitutional ways, which would certainly be correct, if not inane, but to argue 'the government' always acts in constitutional ways is just wrong, because the legislative and executive branches are also part of government and have been found on many occasions, by the Supreme Court, to be acting in unconstitutional ways.
Ok lets go back to 8th grade for a second. The Federal Government is not one unitary thing. It has 3 branches the Executive, Legislative and Judicial.
The Supreme Court is part of the government, more specifically the Judicial branch. They are the arbiters of what is Constitutional. That doesn't mean the other 2 branches, which are also part of the federal government, don't do unconstitutional things. You can say certainly trust the supreme court to act in Constitutional ways, which would certainly be correct, if not inane, but to argue 'the government' always acts in constitutional ways is just wrong, because the legislative and executive branches are also part of government and have been found on many occasions, by the Supreme Court, to be acting in unconstitutional ways.
The fact you choose to interpret my use of government to be limited to the President or Congress is your issue. The fact of the matter is the government acts constitutionally,.
Why, what's the relevance? I am not about to veer off into that discussion, Suffice it to say one has nothing to do with the other. Even if I conceded you were right (which I don't) that doesn't mitigate the need to protect ourselves from Al Qaeda. No matter how much Paulists protest, Afghanistan was necessary for our protection.
What is it about a standing military that operates under world court restraints against terrorists ALWAYS losing, you don't understand. you're not being protected from Al Queda; you're helping to create the damn fools.
Vietnam as an excellent example; funding and weaponry came from any number of countries you had pissed off with your expansionistic foreign policies you were making up as you went along. HOW are todays events any different? You can't engage these guys with a conventional military regardless of how many boots on the ground you can deploy. They'll simply beat feet back into Pakkyville, Somalia or now even Turkey and wait you out. How many countries are you fix'n to invade to get at all of them.
This is the age of the smart phone dude; they can organize a "flash" RPG party with five minutes notice. You can't eradicate them all, you have to remove the reasoning they use to invoke terror against the "evil west".
Anything short of a whole new foreign policy that precludes your involvement in their countries for WHATEVER reason is doomed to abject failure.
The fact you choose to interpret my use of government to be limited to the President or Congress is your issue. The fact of the matter is the government acts constitutionally,.
You have offered nothing to support your position other than your opinion. Just because you proclaim it acts constitutionally doesn't make it so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
And again, that is why we have a supreme court. And of course the SCOTUS decides what is constitutional, so the government always act constitutionally.
With all due respect, that is stunningly simplistic and naive.
And again, that is why we have a supreme court. And of course the SCOTUS decides what is constitutional, so the government always act constitutionally.
If a man rapes someone in front of a cop, and the cop fails to act, that doesn't make rape legal, that's dereliction of duty. Same holds true with the SCOTUS.
The fact you choose to interpret my use of government to be limited to the President or Congress is your issue. The fact of the matter is the government acts constitutionally,.
I interpret you use of the word 'Government' to mean the 'federal government' and all three branches of it. Now if you mean to say the Judicial branch of the government always acts constitutionally you would be right, but you didn't and still are not. You seem to be forgetting that there are 3 branches of govenment and 2 of them have to be sued routinely to be kept in line with the constitution.
Nope, as I said, I trust or government to follow the constitution, and they do. Of course the SCOTUS is part of the government.
We as citizens are responsible for insisting the government operates within Constitutional restraint.
The Supreme Court is made up of men and women every bit as vulnerable to greed and corruption as the rest of us. Assigning blind faith to their judgment is utterly foolish.
You're certainly entitled to disagree with those of us that support Ron Paul. Just as we are entitled to disagree with your apparent support of the status quo.
Personally I'm curious how you can justify electing more of the same in the belief that it will somehow lead to anything different from the increasingly intrusive and unresponsive government that has been developing for at least the last 20yrs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
haha wow you REALLY wanna go there? I suggest you don't or you WILL look and sound stupid. 
