Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-21-2014, 01:13 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,335,072 times
Reputation: 6541

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by oberon_1 View Post
Actually, I have much respect for the constitution. The fact that today we still use it, its the best argument for how well it was written. However, the argument is not with the written part, but with our interpretation of it. To allow the adaptation process, many things were left a little open ended by the original drafters.



Again, its not the written part. Yes, it can be amended, but I am not sure more amendments will improve it. The constitution is was it is. However each generation has the duty to interpret it, to adapt it, so society can live with it. That's what people like Scalia will never understand.
Since you do not think the US Constitution can be improved, then you must consider it perfect as written and amended.

What you fail to comprehend is that the document is a limitation on the power of the federal government. When the federal government fails to adhere to the Supreme Law of the land, the rest of the population suffers. The only interpretation that matters are by those who wrote and amended the document. Future generations can adapt the US Constitution to the times through the amendment process, as we have for the last 225 years.

The Supreme Law of the land should be strictly adhered to, amended when necessary, but never ever deliberately violated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-21-2014, 04:23 AM
 
Location: Sunrise
10,865 posts, read 16,920,499 times
Reputation: 9084
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucknow View Post
Let's hear who you think was a "Good" conservative President!!!!!!
Richard Nixon.

Except for two unforgivable sins, his administration did truly great things for America.

Unforgivable sin #1 was sabotaging the Paris peace talks. Everyone knows what #2 is.


Other than those two whopping-big things, the rest of his administration was a model for organization, foresight and competence. Throw away those two things, and he would have been considered one of our top-10 Presidents. (And we would have been excused the train-wreck that was the Ford administration.) His foreign policy (other than the quagmire of Viet Nam, which he inherited mostly from LBJ) showed foresight of Nostradamus levels. His domestic policies were always realistic and usually put a stop to some problem or another.

Except for two things, I admire Nixon. And even WITH those two things, I would take him in a heartbeat over our last two presidents. That's how bad the past 14 years have been for this country. Nixon would be not just an improvement, but a HEAD AND SHOULDERS, NIGHT AND DAY, THANK YOU DEITY FOR BRINGING HIM BACK improvement.

When we needed a Roosevelt, we got the dumbest of the Bushes and then Obama.


‘Richard Nixon retired very happily:’ What if Watergate hadn’t happened (From the archives) - The Washington Post
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 05:30 AM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,335,072 times
Reputation: 6541
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoopLV View Post
Richard Nixon.

Except for two unforgivable sins, his administration did truly great things for America.

Unforgivable sin #1 was sabotaging the Paris peace talks. Everyone knows what #2 is.


Other than those two whopping-big things, the rest of his administration was a model for organization, foresight and competence. Throw away those two things, and he would have been considered one of our top-10 Presidents. (And we would have been excused the train-wreck that was the Ford administration.) His foreign policy (other than the quagmire of Viet Nam, which he inherited mostly from LBJ) showed foresight of Nostradamus levels. His domestic policies were always realistic and usually put a stop to some problem or another.

Except for two things, I admire Nixon. And even WITH those two things, I would take him in a heartbeat over our last two presidents. That's how bad the past 14 years have been for this country. Nixon would be not just an improvement, but a HEAD AND SHOULDERS, NIGHT AND DAY, THANK YOU DEITY FOR BRINGING HIM BACK improvement.

When we needed a Roosevelt, we got the dumbest of the Bushes and then Obama.


‘Richard Nixon retired very happily:’ What if Watergate hadn’t happened (From the archives) - The Washington Post
I would still support impeaching any President that abused the power of their office the way Nixon did, and the way Obama has. I voted for Nixon in 1972, and I fully supported the Articles of Impeachment drawn against him. I still think he was a good President, who crossed an unacceptable line.

Obama, on the other hand, is a completely inept and utterly naive President who has crossed that unacceptable line numerous times, and Democrats are perfectly fine with that. Is anyone surprised? So much for liberal honor and integrity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 06:03 AM
 
Location: Sunrise
10,865 posts, read 16,920,499 times
Reputation: 9084
Watergate is a "meh" for me. I'm more appalled about the Paris peace talks. Watergate didn't kill many, many soldiers.

But think that everyone can agree that with the exception of a couple whopping-big things, Nixon wasn't just a good president. He was a GREAT president. He's always going to be the Pete Rose of politics. (The best analogy I can come up with. With the exception of ONE THING, Rose was one of the best baseball players ever.)

Incidentally, I'm about as liberal as they come. But the Democrats are not liberal. It is insulting to suggest that they are. There are exactly two people in Washington who I support -- Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. My Utopia is a nation full of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warrens. Quit trying to pin Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi on me. I don't want them in office either. Liz and Bernie have my back. Nobody else at the federal level does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 06:50 AM
 
58,414 posts, read 26,740,768 times
Reputation: 14077
[quote=oberon_1;36575071][quote=nononsenseguy;36574804]
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Sure it was, or it wouldn't be so vague.

Like it or not, times changed (for better or worse, depending on your view).

Some amendments of the constitution are simply irrelevant today. That is a fact. Other things at the center of current public debate are not even mentioned in the constitution. Its understandable, since the founding father could not tell 250 years in advance what US would be in the 21st century.
Here is a quick exercise: try to write a constitution for the society in 2250 and you'll find it very difficult. Here comes the "living constitution" idea. It breathes and changes with time and society. It can live for very long.
The only other option is a dead document, we could bury today.
And perhaps one more exercise: Can you name one country (out of 220+) that live its daily life by closely following a document written 250 years ago?
"Some amendments of the constitution are simply irrelevant today. That is a fact."

"A fact". Really? Who died and made you the supreme decision maker on constitutional issues?

There is a process CREATED by the Founding Father's called "Amendments".

ANY idea you have that you think ought to be changed, start an Amendment process.

I wonder how far ANY of them would go?

"Life's tough......It's even tougher if you're stupid."

John Wayne
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 06:55 AM
 
58,414 posts, read 26,740,768 times
Reputation: 14077
Quote:
Originally Posted by oberon_1 View Post
Actually, I have much respect for the constitution. The fact that today we still use it, its the best argument for how well it was written. However, the argument is not with the written part, but with our interpretation of it. To allow the adaptation process, many things were left a little open ended by the original drafters.



Again, its not the written part. Yes, it can be amended, but I am not sure more amendments will improve it. The constitution is was it is. However each generation has the duty to interpret it, to adapt it, so society can live with it. That's what people like Scalia will never understand.
" However each generation has the duty to interpret it,"

I respectfully disagree. By reading the Federalist papers it can be seen HOW the Constitution was written and HOW it should taken. It is VERY clear what the founding Father's meanings were.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 07:02 AM
 
58,414 posts, read 26,740,768 times
Reputation: 14077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector1 View Post
I agree with the first sentence and wonder if you voted for him despite his obvious lack of experience and qualification for the most important job in our country?

As to you next sentence, I find it hard to believe you can be that brainwashed. If anything he has been one of the least effective presidents that has ever held the office, certainly in my lifetime. Let's not forget that the countries biggest problem when he came into office was the economy and lack of jobs. Instead of focusing on that as his primary issue, he used his political capital to push through Obamacare on a purely partisan basis and poisoned the well for any chance of working with the other side of the isle. So if Obamacare is the only thing to hang his hat on, you can hardly say he managed to get government working again.
All he and the (D's) did was create a situation to where they lost the House and set up gridlock which we are still experiencing today. The (D's) have no chance to take back the House this midterm, so regardless of what happens in the Senate, six of eight years will have been a disfunctioning government.
As I said, Obama seems incapable of getting the government to work because unlike those other presidents you mentioned, he does not have the leadership ability to do so. Maybe if he had some previous executive experience he might have been able to know how to bride the divide like Reagan/Clinton, but instead we are stuck with someone who will go down as one of the least effective leaders in our history.
I'd take any of the other POTUS's you listed at half capacity, and they would still be far more successful than Obama ever can be.

"did manage to make government work where it hadn't before."

"I find it hard to believe you can be that brainwashed."

I agree with you.

How ANYONE can call Obama affective when the ONLY he has managed to do is get O Care passed using shenanigans.

The fact that not ONE repub in EITHER HOUSE voted for it certainly is NOT how the government is supposed to work.

When he doesn't get his way, "I have a phone and a pen". By-passing Congress certainly is NOT the way the government is supposed to work.

Of course those that support him believe in "The end justifies the means".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 08:19 AM
 
26,122 posts, read 14,759,406 times
Reputation: 14316
Does anyone think that the "progressives" will ever come back around to FDR beliefs like opposing free handouts to able-bodied people with no work in return, opposing public unions, etc?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 08:22 AM
 
11,086 posts, read 8,493,926 times
Reputation: 6392
We're in the middle of a second gilded age. We're nowhere near having someone like either of the Roosevelts in office.

All the pols today are bought and paid for by billionaires and would appear at work naked if their Lords told them to. That includes Obummer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2014, 08:30 AM
 
79,900 posts, read 43,855,613 times
Reputation: 17184
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
I would still support impeaching any President that abused the power of their office the way Nixon did, and the way Obama has. I voted for Nixon in 1972, and I fully supported the Articles of Impeachment drawn against him. I still think he was a good President, who crossed an unacceptable line.

Obama, on the other hand, is a completely inept and utterly naive President who has crossed that unacceptable line numerous times, and Democrats are perfectly fine with that. Is anyone surprised? So much for liberal honor and integrity.
Not disagreeing but.........

Bush signed McCain/Feingold while acknowledging it was unconstitutional. It was unconstitutional but did the "right" condemn Bush for that? What should be the results of a president signing something he knew was unconstitutional?

Bush argued his entire presidency that he could simply ignore the due process rights of American citizens. How does that not cross the line?

Obama has simply built upon the things Bush started. Where was the honor and integrity when Bush was doing this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top